Home Uncategorized Amanda Smith

Uncategorized

Amanda Smith

Discussion 2: This Course as a Prerequisite for the Final Doctoral Study

How might this course contribute to your final doctoral study? As you continue exploring the field and practice of health care administration, your experiences throughout the Doctor of Healthcare Administration program will help inform the planning, design, and completion of your doctoral study. As you explore the topics in each course in your program, reflect on how the topics covered might relate to and contribute to your research.

For this Discussion, reflect on your experiences in completing this course. Consider how this course might contribute to your doctoral study and practice of health care administration. Then, review the DHA doctoral study guidebook in this week’s resources. This doctoral study guidebook outlines the processes necessary to complete the requirements for the doctoral study in the DHA program.

Part 1

Post an explanation of how this course contributes to the doctoral study you will complete in the research forum (DDHA 8900/9100).

Part 2

Continue the Discussion and suggest additional insights on how completion of this course may contribute to future doctoral study.

Walden University

Doctoral Study
Guidebook

Doctor of Healthcare Administration (DHA)

For internal use only.

Walden University
Academic Offices
100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 900
Minneapolis, MN 55401
1-800-WALDENU (1-800-925-3368)
Walden University is accredited by The Higher Learning Commission and a member of the North Central Association, www.ncahlc.org.

Contents
Contents

Introduction

The Walden University Doctoral Study Statement

How This Guidebook Is Organized

Part 1. The Doctoral Study Process

Process Overview

Term Planning and Term Grades

Beginning the Process

Doctoral Study Prospectus Form Draft

Doctoral Study Supervisory Committee

Doctoral Study Prospectus Form Approval

Registering for Doctoral Study Credits

Developing the Proposal

Gaining URR Approval of the Proposal

Proposal Oral Defense

Getting IRB Approval

Completing the Doctoral Study

Gaining URR Approval of the Doctoral Study

Form and Style Review

Doctoral Study Oral Defense

Final Approval and Submission

Academic Integrity and Plagiarism

Part 2. Style: APA and Walden University

Overall Structure

Abstract

Appendices

Definitions of Terms and Glossaries

Copyrights and Permission to Use

Crediting Sources

Footnotes

Point of View

Verb Tense

Inclusive Language

Type

Line Spacing

Margins and Page Numbers

Headings

Lists: Seriation

Tables and Figures

Numbers and Percentages

Abbreviations

Spelling, Grammar, and Punctuation

Capitalization

Sample
Pages

Part 3: Frequently Asked Questions

Questions About the Doctoral Study Process

Questions About Form and Style

Introduction
The final phase of study for Walden University doctoral students is completion of a doctoral study, which begins with the preparation of a Doctoral Study Prospectus and ends with approval of the final doctoral study. Walden requires the doctoral study to reflect a high level of scholarly effort and to be an original contribution to the knowledge or professional practice in a practice-based setting. Students should demonstrate knowledge of research design and execution as well as the ability to interpret research findings both orally and in writing. The final product should have the level of detail and sophistication expected of a doctoral level scholar-practitioner in the discipline.

The Walden University Doctoral Study Statement
This statement is designed to provide a broad vision of the Walden University doctoral study and an understanding of the university’s doctoral study requirements:
The Walden University doctoral study embraces and reflects the core values and mission of the university. Walden strives to produce graduates who combine academic credentials with professional skills and leaders whose actions are motivated by informed intellect and educated attitudes. As accomplished practitioners, Walden students bring a wealth of expertise to their studies. Walden’s curricula then provide the foundation upon which students build their competence and mold their interests, culminating in the doctoral study learning experience. Through this process, Walden graduates are provided the learning necessary to set forth new ideas through enlightened insights and to effect change in individuals, organizations, and society.
Because Walden students and their courses of study vary, the nature and purposes of the doctoral study also vary. The university’s approach to scholarship is flexible. The doctoral study can be built upon a foundation of basic or applied research, multidisciplinary perspectives on scholarship, improved teaching, or an appropriate and acceptable combination of different forms of rigorous scholarship. Each suits the Walden doctoral study insofar as it relates to the nature and purpose of the inquiry and demonstrates a literate grounding in the relevant fields in which it is written, while maintaining the fundamental elements of quality and integrity required of stewards of the discipline.
The Walden doctoral study demonstrates a commitment to improving the caliber of professional practice. It is an inquiry that addresses unanswered questions or issues lacking thorough study and envisions what could happen as a result of the research outcomes. It contributes to professional practice by offering new knowledge or new understanding of existing knowledge arrived at through rigorous application of appropriate research methodology and provides a basis for further research. Therefore, the results of a research study conducted for a Walden doctoral study are worthy of publication as a significant contribution to professional practice.
The Walden doctoral study demonstrates a commitment to addressing the phenomena of social change and, within that context, exhibits sensitivity to societal conditions and a consideration of social issues.
The Walden doctoral study confirms a student’s understanding of and commitment to academic honesty and scholarly integrity.
Every doctoral study is shaped by the university’s core values of integrity and quality, as well as its mission: to provide a diverse community of career professionals with the opportunity to transform themselves as scholar-practitioners so that they can effect positive social change. The doctoral study is the unifying culmination of a doctoral student’s academic experience at Walden. The most important outcome of all teaching and learning at Walden is to produce graduates with the knowledge, skills, and abilities to:
Understand and continuously develop and change themselves, the organizations in which they work, and society at large.
Create new knowledge dedicated to the improvement of social conditions and to impact society positively by putting that knowledge into practice by both modeling their learning through action and by being civically engaged.
Continue learning across their lifetimes as practitioners, researchers, and scholars and continue to impact social change.
Achieve professional excellence as active and influential professionals by applying their learning to specific problems and challenges in their work settings and professional practice.
Be information literate, including knowing the literature of their professional fields and reading it critically.
Understand the design and methods of inquiry in their professional fields.
Practice in their professional fields legally and ethically.
Communicate effectively, particularly in communicating their learning and research to others.
Appreciate, respect, and advocate for diversity and multiculturalism within their professional fields.
Function flexibly and effectively in a variety of educational environments, including online and distributed environments.

How This Guidebook Is Organized
The Doctoral Study Guidebook complements other important resources during this phase of the graduate students’ career. Such resources include the students’ doctoral study supervisory committee, their academic program leaders, the academic advisors and other university staff members, the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA style manual), and the Walden Writing Center.

The

Doctoral S

tudy

Process
. Part 1 of this guidebook describes the steps of the doctoral study process, including the use of evaluative rubrics. Part 1 also explains the policies and procedures related to ethical standards and use of human subjects in research.

Style: APA and Walden University
. Form and style guidelines are provided in Part 2, as an introduction and a supplement to the APA style manual. The APA style manual is the students’ main source of form and style information when writing their doctoral study. References to APA style in this edition of the Doctoral Study Guidebook reflect the seventh edition of the APA style manual. When the university has style preferences for doctoral study that supersede APA guidelines, those preferences are indicated in green boxes.

Frequently Asked Questions
. Part 3 of this guidebook includes a series of frequently asked questions regarding the doctoral study process as well as form and style issues.

Part 1. The Doctoral Study Process
The processes for doctoral study are continually evaluated and updated to make the experience straightforward for both faculty members and students. The steps are detailed in this guidebook. A shorter description of the doctoral study process and relevant forms can be found on the Office of Student Research Administration (OSRA) section of the Walden University website.

Process Overview
If students wish to graduate in a specific term, they must plan their program carefully. Students should begin planning for program completion at least 13 months in advance of their anticipated graduation date. The table below provides a quick summary of the steps involved in completing the doctoral study. The following sections describe these steps in more detail.

Step

Description

Prospectus Form Draft

The doctoral study prospectus form is a research plan that helps students organize, delineate, and make decisions regarding their doctoral study and appropriate research style. Students begin drafting their research prospectus form in DDHA 8246. The prospectus form draft is used to assign the supervisory committee before starting the official Doctoral Study phase of the program.

Committee Nomination

At this time, students will be assigned their doctoral study supervisory committee, following the steps outlined for their program of study. Students are assigned a committee chair and committee member who provide guidance related to the content and research methods appropriate to the study. After approval of the prospectus, a third member serving in the role of the university research reviewer (URR) is assigned by the program director or designee.

Prospectus Form Approval

Building on the work completed in DDHA 8246 students will work with their supervisory committee to complete and have approved their official research prospectus. The doctoral study prospectus is a research plan that helps students organize, delineate, and make decisions regarding their doctoral study and appropriate research style. The prospectus serves as an agreed-upon
plan for developing the proposal
and finalizes
the

structure of the doctoral study supervisory committee.
The supervisory committee uses the Doctoral Study Prospectus Rubric (see MyDR) to give feedback on the prospectus.

Proposal Development

The first two sections of a doctoral study are known as the doctoral study proposal
. The proposal
establishes the rationale for conducting the study
, including a review and analysis of the relevant literature, and
describes the design and methodology
that will be utilized for

the study. Students work with their supervisory committee to develop the proposal, consulting the specific university-approved doctoral study checklist indicators that will be used to organize the doctoral study. When ready, students complete a self-evaluation of the doctoral study checklist and a Turnitin report and submit these documents to their doctoral study chair, via MyDR. (
Note:
The doctoral study chair may complete a separate Turnitin report, which is submitted to the URR member for review along with the doctoral study checklist and proposal). Students’ committee members, including the URR member, evaluate the proposal within MyDR against the Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubric using the annotated checklist that students provide to guide their reviews.

Proposal University Research Review

When the supervisory committee is satisfied that the proposal meets all the requirements specified in the minimum standards rubric, the chair submits the proposal, Turnitin report, the doctoral study checklist, and completed rubrics from each member to the assigned committee member serving in the URR role, via MyDR. The URR member reviews the proposal, again using the minimum standards rubric, including items relevant to content, methodology, form and style, and ethical procedures. The URR member either approves the proposal, which enables the student to set up an oral conference or return the proposal with a set of suggested revisions. Students work with their committee to make any requested revisions.

Proposal Oral Presentation

Following URR approval, students orally present the proposal to their committee via teleconference scheduled with OSRA. Requests should be made 1 week in advance of the meeting. This presentation is used to confirm students’ plans for their research, clarify any remaining questions that committee members may have regarding the study, and help ensure that students initiate their research from a sound foundation. After the proposal has been successfully defended, the chair approves the Proposal Oral Presentation within MyDR.
Note:
Walden provides a conference call service for the oral defense that is toll-free for most countries outside the United States. Students living in areas outside this coverage will be responsible for toll charges associated with this call.

IRB Approval

Walden’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) reviews each study conducted by Walden students to determine if the anticipated benefits of the study outweigh risks associated with participation in it. While developing their proposal, students should draft the IRB application and submit it to their chair for feedback. After the proposal has received final approval following the presentation, students receive a notice from MyDR to submit their formal application directly to the IRB.
Note:
Please remember that no data may be collected until IRB approval is granted.

Doctoral study Completion

Following IRB approval, students can collect and analyze their data and report their findings, complete the remaining sections of their doctoral study, and prepare the abstract. They complete the doctoral study checklist and another Turnitin report to submit to their doctoral study chair, via MyDR.
Note:
The doctoral study chair may again complete a separate Turnitin report, which is submitted to the URR member for review along with the doctoral study.

Doctoral study University Research Review

When the supervisory committee is satisfied that the full doctoral study draft and abstract meet all the requirements specified in the minimum standards rubric, the chair submits the doctoral study, abstract, completed doctoral study checklist, rubrics from each member, and Turnitin report to the URR member, via MyDR, for review of the abstract and Sections 3 and 4. Students work with their committee to make any requested revisions.

Form and Style Review

Upon URR approval of the doctoral study and abstract, the URR uploads a clean copy of the doctoral study to their approval within MyDR, which automatically moves the document to a Writing Center editor for a form and style review—a final check for errors in APA style, spelling, grammar, punctuation, and related issues.

Final Oral Presentation

After receipt of the form and style evaluation, students present their doctoral study via teleconference scheduled with OSRA. Requests should be made 1 week in advance of the meeting. This final oral defense is a formal discussion of the scholarly content of the doctoral study, followed by an evaluation of the doctoral study. At this point, students may need to revise the doctoral study based on feedback during the teleconference as well as from the form and style review.

Final University Research Review

After successful completion of the oral defense and committee approval of the doctoral study, the student submits their final doctoral study to their committee, via MyDR. If approved, the chair forwards the final doctoral study and abstract to the URR member, within MyDR, for a final review to make sure all methodological, content, and writing issues have been addressed. In addition, the URR member reviews the abstract to make sure it meets university guidelines.

Chief Academic Officer Review

After final URR approval, the abstract is sent by the URR, via MyDR, to the university’s chief academic officer (CAO) or designee as a final endorsement of the study. Revisions may be required, and these changes are facilitated through consultation with the chair and others. Upon CAO approval, the doctoral study is officially completed.

ProQuest Submission

To graduate from Walden University, students must submit their doctoral study to ProQuest for publishing. After this submission has been approved, students have completed all the graduation requirements for the doctoral study and their degree can be validated.

Term Planning and Term Grades
Term grades are determined according to the Chair-approved term goals submitted in weeks 1 and 2 each term. Your Blackboard course has detailed information about developing term plans and term grading, so please review that information. Your Blackboard course provides a link to a blank, 11-week Term Plan document with further instructions.
The following information outlines the requirements for term planning and grading. This information does not replace the requirements in your Blackboard course.
Below are critical elements to consider when creating your term goals and understanding term grades.
1. Term goals are created and approved based on your previous terms achievements and the current work needed to show progress towards graduation.
2. Term grades are determined by achieving your Chair-approved term goals each term.
a. Term goals are set to ensure students make adequate progress towards graduation each term.
b. When you see the term “making progress”, it is referring to progress towards graduation; and achieving your term goal is the tangible evidence that progress is taking place.
c. Term goals are submitted in week 1 for an initial review and approval and resubmitted in week 2 if needed.
d. Without approved term goals, students will earn a U grade in the term.
e. Term grades are not determined by effort or the number of draft submissions.
3. Mid-term reviews are completed to ensure students are on target for achieving their Chair-approved term goals.
a. Mid-term reviews are not designed to change the original term goals.
b. If a student has a documented, extenuating circumstance they should request a review of the term goals and possible modification of term goals.
c. Changing term goals at the mid-term is rare and requires justification.
4. The final term plan must note that the term goals were achieved in order to receive a Satisfactory (S) for the term.
5. The final research draft submitted must demonstrate evidence that the original term goals were achieved.
Beginning the Process
Students begin the doctoral study phase of their program when they complete their research prospectus and are assigned the first two members of the doctoral study committee: a chair and a committee member. More detailed information on the committee can be found in the Doctoral Study Committee Process document. These documents, forms, and additional supporting resources can be found on the Doctoral Study Resources section of Walden’s Center for Research Quality website.
Information can also be found on the Doctoral Degree Coach, a virtual interactive planning tool to help you stay on track with completing your doctoral study

Doctoral Study Prospectus Form Draft
Before starting the official Doctoral Study phase of the program student will take DDHA 8246 – Advanced Application of Practice-Based Research for Health. In DDHA 8246 students will learn about the key elements that are needed to create a research prospectus (research plan). The doctoral study prospectus provides information that is needed to identify a justified research problem, research variables and other critical elements for the completion of the doctoral study. Writing the prospectus will help students organize, delineate, and make decisions regarding their topic and appropriate research style. An approved prospectus serves as an agreed-upon
plan for developing the proposal
and finalizes the
structure of the doctoral study supervisory committee
.
The prospectus consists of several small sections, which are explained in detail on the prospectus resources located on the DHA Doctoral Study webpage. The goal for the prospectus is to create a plan for developing the doctoral study proposal. In DDHA 8246 students will complete a research prospectus draft that will be used to assign their supervisory committee before they begin the official work on their doctoral study.
Following the successful completion of DDHA 8246 students work with their chair in a companion course—Research Forum (DDHA 8901) that supports prospectus development. Students will continue the work on their prospectus in DDHA 8901 led by their chair before moving into a doctoral study completion course (DDHA 9100) with their chair.

Doctoral Study Supervisory Committee
The doctoral study supervisory committee is a unique feature of doctoral education. The primary goal of the committee is to provide students with the guidance and support that they will need to conduct an independent research project of the highest quality and relevancy. Walden doctoral study supervisory committees are generally composed of three members:
· Committee
chair
, your Committee chair will work with you in a Blackboard course each term and will help you develop a term plan to ensure you are progressing towards graduation each term. The Committee chair is charged with assessing your achievement of the term plan goal and posting a grade each term based on the achievement of the term plan goal.
· Committee
member
, the second committee is not in the Blackboard course each term but is waiting perform reviews and provides input at the request of the Committee Chair.
· Committee
university research reviewer (URR), serves in a quality assurance role and provide detailed input on the research design and alignment of the study. The URR begins their work when the committee is nearing the approval of the research proposal.
The first two members of the committee will be assigned by the program directors or their designee. The URR member will be assigned to the committee at the time that the committee is seeking approval of the research proposal, The Faculty Expertise Directory (available on the myWalden university portal) is a resource for information on the diverse experience and expertise found among the Walden faculty. Other faculty members, program leaders, and the academic advisors assist students with locating faculty members who may be both suitable and available for their committee.
A few guidelines are used to shape committee formation. Between the chair and second member, someone must be designated as the
content expert
and someone as the
methods expert
, although one person can do both. Students should also be mindful of any department-mandated core courses, pertinent residencies, and prerequisites that must be completed before they work with their doctoral study supervisory committee members.

To assign a committee member,
a student must complete a draft prospectus form. To be assigned a doctoral study committee chair, a student must have successfully completed DDHA 8246. In the case where a student does not have an approved prospectus form in DDHA 8246 the student must retake the course. The program director or their designee will use the prospectus form to assign faculty members to serve on the committee and, after the nominee’s service has been approved by the program director, the student begins the process of finalizing the prospectus form. Students will be assigned a committee chair first and committee member, upon the completion of DDHA 8246.

The roles and responsibility of the supervisory committee members is important for students to remember. The Doctoral Study phase of the program is an independent research phase of the program where students demonstrate their ability to conduct advanced research. Supervisory committee members are not charge with instructing or teaching foundational concepts in the discipline or related to research. Students are expected to have learned the foundation research concepts and other discipline knowledge and skills during their completion of course work and prior to starting the Doctoral phase of the program. Below are some critical details to remember as you work with your supervisory committee:

Although the committee members guide your progress, you are ultimately responsible for preparing a doctoral study that meets the rigors of academic excellence.

To that end, you will work with your doctoral study supervisory committee until your doctoral study is complete, as briefly described below.
· A Committee Chair is required to coordinate communication with the other committee members to reduce confusion and to keep requested changes organized.
· The committee members will be engaged with you throughout the doctoral study process, directly guiding you through the proposal, research and analysis, and final oral conference.
· The committee uses the Walden University Doctoral Study Checklist and Minimum Standards Rubric to communicate with you about your level of compliance with standards for acceptable work.
· Although the doctoral study must represent your work, the committee members are expected to offer full support from their experiences as scholar-practitioners in your discipline or field.
· The supervisory committee is comprised of a unique panel of experts who will have differing viewpoints based on their individual expertise, so it should be expected that the research may undergo changes unique to the expertise of each committee member.
· The committee’s guidance to you will be “team advice.” Any written dialogue between you and a committee member should be shared among all committee members. Because there may be multiple perspectives and diverse opinions in this context, your committee chair will act as an arbitrator to resolve conflicts and obtain a consensus.
· Unique to Doctoral level research is the ability of each supervisory committee member to require changes before a study is approved. This is type of review and approval is referred to as a “Peer review” in research and publication venues.

Roles of the Committee Members

Committee Chair

The chair of your doctoral study supervisory committee is the key person in your doctoral study process. The committee chair is primarily responsible for ensuring that your doctoral study meets all Walden University requirements, including those pertaining to content coverage, methodology, research ethics, and form and style.
The chair is also responsible for ensuring that the work of the committee effectively fulfills the expectations of both service to you and service to the academic discipline(s) and professional field(s) of practice involved. The chair leads the committee as it works with you on your doctoral study and acts as an arbitrator to resolve any conflicts within the committee.
The committee chair must lead, monitor, coordinate, and assess the progress of your doctoral study from start to finish. This responsibility includes the following:
· Providing you with feedback on writing the problem statement, conceptualizing the research issues, and identifying the breadth and magnitude of the literature review. Feedback may include guidance on accurately focusing on an issue, establishing topic importance, making the research intent clear, identifying all variables and potential relationships, and clarifying the proposed research.
· Discussing how the research outcomes may affect social behavior or change. Your chair will provide you with feedback on the overall significance of the research findings or outcomes and how they may contribute to new knowledge and benefit the profession.
· Offering you overall guidance about the acceptability of the doctoral study, taking into account program norms and the expectations of your professional area and discipline.
· Determining whether the proposal and doctoral study are ready for advancement to the next milestone in the process, ensuring that the input of the other committee members and the Form and Style Review, at the doctoral study stage, have been incorporated.

Committee Member

The committee member collaborates with the chair throughout the doctoral study process to provide specific expertise regarding the acceptability of the doctoral study, taking into account Walden University’s rubric requirements, the expectations of the program and profession, and form and style requirements. The committee member’s guidance may be primarily as a methodology expert, a content expert, or a combination of both areas of expertise.
The committee member will support the committee chair through his or her respective expertise and any special knowledge that he or she may be able to contribute to your doctoral study. A committee member must coordinate with the committee chair before beginning to work with you.

Committee University Research Reviewer (URR)

The purpose of the URR process is to ensure that your finished doctoral study meets the graduate-level expectations of the university. To help you complete a high-quality doctoral study, the committee URR provides independent feedback on all aspects of your work.
The URR is assigned to your committee by your program director or designee, after reviewing your approved prospectus. The specific duties of the URR are to (a) consult with your supervisory committee on your proposal and doctoral study and (b) to perform final reviews of your proposal and doctoral study prior to your advancing to the two oral conferences. Students usually do not interact with the URR directly.
The independence of the URR enables him or her to view your doctoral study in the manner that a potential employer or research colleague would view it. An external party unfamiliar with your doctoral study may notice portions of your work where points could be made in a clearer manner, which your committee members, who are very familiar with your work, could overlook. For this reason, all proposals and doctoral studies must receive approval from a URR before an oral conference can be scheduled.

External Committee Member (Rare)

In some rare cases, the committee chair may conclude that special expertise is needed to mentor or evaluate a specific aspect of your research topic appropriately. In such instances, an external (non-Walden) fourth member may be added to the committee. The qualifications of this fourth member of the committee shall include all the following:
· Expertise on the research topic not otherwise available to you within the Walden faculty.
· Possession of the highest academic degree awarded in the field.
· A record of publications in scholarly journals closely associated with the topic area.
· A record of guiding the development of doctoral studies in the topic area.
· Evidence of current, active involvement in research related to the topic area.
A request for such a member must be accompanied by a copy of the proposed member’s curriculum vitae (CV) and a letter from you including all the points above. Review and approval of a non-Walden member nominated to a doctoral study supervisory committee is within the purview of the program director or designee. Nomination of such a member is initiated by you, approved by the committee chair, and then evaluated by the program director, who determines whether the request will be approved. An external member of a doctoral study supervisory committee has the same rights and responsibilities as any other committee member.

Note: Fourth members serve on a voluntary basis without pay. Approval to serve on a committee does not imply compensation for serving on the committee.

Essential Committee Functions

Between the committee chair and the committee member, two functions must be fulfilled. One member of your committee must show demonstrated expertise in the content area of your doctoral study, and one member must be a recognized expert in the research methodology that you will be using. These two functions may be split between the two, or the chair or member could perform both roles, described below.

Content Expert

Assists you with the following:
· Conceptualizing the research issues.
· Preparing a literature review that provides a comprehensive summary of current knowledge of the doctoral study’s subject matter and identifies gaps therein.
· Identifying all applicable variables (e.g., concepts, constructs) and their potential relationships to the study.
· Articulating a clearly defined research question.
· Establishing the significance of the topic and the potential of the study to contribute to positive social change.
Provides feedback on the following:
· Degree to which assumptions and limitations impact upon the research conclusions.
· Comprehensiveness of the literature review and theoretical base of the study (if appropriate).
· Potential for research outcomes to contribute to positive social change.
· Overall significance of the research findings or outcomes.
Methodology Expert
Provides feedback to students on the following items:
· Proposed research design including appropriateness for addressing the problem statement and research questions/focus.
· Selection of specific methodology.
· Selection of a sample of appropriate characteristics and size.
· Implementation of the selected methodology, assuring compliance with
· Program and/or professional norms.
· Generally accepted ethical and moral principles regarding human subjects.
· Provide constructive criticism about
· Data collection and analysis.
· Presentation of the data and the conclusions drawn from the analyses.

University Research Reviewer

The University Research Review provides a consistent and reliable quality assurance process for student research, including the following:
Maintaining a high level of integrity in Walden students’ research.
Facilitating consistency in the application of university research standards.
Providing timely and substantive feedback that is within the defined scope of the URR role:
· The defined scope includes feedback related to theoretical, methodological, and analytical content as well as organization. The URR uses the Minimum Standards Rubric as the means for providing this feedback.
· The defined scope does not include minor form and style and ethical issues; however, the
· URR is instructed to alert students to such issues when found. On occasion, the URR may make a mandatory referral to the Writing Center or the Institutional Review Board for advice on such issues.
Determining if the proposal and doctoral study are ready for advancement to the next milestone in the process.
· URR approval, expressed through scores and comments entered in the doctoral study rubric, is a prerequisite for conducting oral conference of the proposal and doctoral study, as well as for submitting the abstract to the CAO for final approval.

Changing a Committee Member

The approved committee will serve until your doctoral study has been completed and approved.
After work on your doctoral study has commenced, only under special circumstances will the restructuring of a committee be considered.
Appointments of doctoral study committee members are decisions informed by the best knowledge available at the time of the decision. Although most relationships with faculty members will endure for the tenure of a student’s academic career, the university recognizes that situations arise that may necessitate change in the duration of such services.
When circumstances necessitate reconsideration of faculty appointments, the process detailed below will be followed to help minimize disruption of academic service:
When requesting a change of your committee chair or committee member, you will need to complete the Student Petition Request form (available on myWalden) with the college.

Note: The committee URR is assigned by the college and is not subject to change by student petition. An appointment of a new committee URR may be required if the focus of the study evolves outside the current URR’s expertise. The committee chair can employ the URR appeals process to mediate any perceived disagreements between the committee and the URR.
Your request for a change will be reviewed, and your academic program director or designee will render a decision. To help with that decision you should provide the following information on the petition form:
· Describe the outcome that you are seeking. For example: “I would like to change my methodologist to one that is better aligned with my project”
· Provide a detailed rationale that demonstrates the need for the requested change. For example, “I have decided to use a different methodology, based on the literature review that I conducted”
If a change in committee formation is approved, you will work with the program director or designee to assign another member as noted above. Any change in committee formation will become effective at the start of the next term. You can obtain further information about this process from the Academic Advising Team.
Students can find more guidance in the Doctoral Degree Coach.

Doctoral Study Prospectus Form Approval
Upon the successful completion of DDHA 8246 student will continue to work on their prospectus with their supervisory committee. The doctoral study prospectus form builds on the premise and provides more information about the doctoral study research. Writing the prospectus will help students organize, delineate, and make decisions regarding their topic and appropriate research style. An approved prospectus serves as an agreed-upon
plan for developing the proposal
and finalizes the
structure of the doctoral study supervisory committee
. The Doctoral Study Prospectus guide provides more details on the document and process.
The prospectus consists of several small sections, which are explained in detail on the prospectus resources located on the DHA Doctoral Study webpage. The goal for the prospectus is to create a plan for developing the doctoral study proposal. The remaining work on the doctoral study will occur when the proposal is written. The final draft of the prospectus is assessed against the quality indicators in the Doctoral Study Prospectus Rubric within MyDR. After both committee members have approved the final version of the prospectus and completed their rubrics, the chair approves the document within MyDR, automatically sending a request to the program director for the final approval.
During the first term with their supervisory committee students work with their chair in a companion course—Research Forum (DDHA 8901) that supports prospectus development. Students will continue to work on their prospectus in DDHA 8901 led by their chair before moving into a doctoral study completion course (DDHA 9100) with their chair.
As for the proposal and doctoral study, for which students will receive feedback on working drafts, prospectus development is an iterative process. When the prospectus is completed, students should follow the submission guidelines for their program. Generally, students should submit a final prospectus to their doctoral study supervisory committee for review after completion of the research sequence and

as required in the students’ doctoral research
DDHA 8901
forum course,
if students are currently enrolled in this course;

toward the end of their time in a research
DDHA 8901
forum course,
following the guidance of the chair; or,

prior

to beginning the doctoral study proposal
in the DDHA 9100 – Research Forum, following the guidance of the chair.

Registering for Doctoral Study Credits
Students enrolled in a
course-based program must register for a minimum of 20 doctoral study credits. Registration for the doctoral study course DDHA 9100, takes place during the regular course registration period. Once registered for the first term, students are then registered automatically for the doctoral study course until the doctoral study is formally approved by the CAO.

Note: Students who have an approved doctoral study supervisory committee may register for the doctoral study forum course during any term in which they are working on the prospectus and/or proposal and doctoral study. Students who have only a committee chair may register for the doctoral study forum course, but they will not be able to submit their proposal for review until they have an approved committee.
All students should check the
Walden University Catalog
regarding their program’s prerequisites for enrolling in the doctoral study course.

Developing the Proposal

The proposal consists of the first two sections of the doctoral study document and an APA style reference list. The proposal presents a detailed plan of the proposed research for the doctoral study and describes a specific idea, the related literature, and the intended research methodology.
Students should consult with their committee chair early and frequently when developing the proposal. With guidance from their supervisory committee, students conceptualize a topic, organize and synthesize the literature, and determine a research methodology and secondary data set appropriate to the subject matter.
Additional details and information on developing and writing the proposal and doctoral study are found within this guidebook, on the Center for Research Quality website, and at the Walden Writing Center. The Writing Center offers a doctoral study template, which can be very useful.
Consult the Doctoral Study Checklists and Minimum Standards Rubric
Walden’s Doctoral Study Checklists are used to operationalize Walden’s Doctoral S
tudy
. Each checklist is designed to assist students, doctoral study supervisory committees, and the university’s academic leadership in determining whether a doctoral study meets Walden’s standards.
Students should download the appropriate

doctoral study checklist

when their committee and prospectus are approved.

Walden’s evaluations for the doctoral study follow a university-approved process, as described below:
The purpose of the doctoral study checklist is to guide students and doctoral study supervisory committees as they work together to develop high-quality doctoral proposals and a doctoral study. The checklist should be shared with students early in their doctoral programs and frequently used in advisement with their committee and graduate courses to reflect Walden’s expectations for high-quality doctoral studies. The checklist is designed to help ensure rigorous reporting across the common components that are used to build the doctoral study.
A specific doctoral study checklist has been developed for use with studies employing quantitative designs. As students begin the process of developing a proposal for the doctoral study, the quantitative checklist will be used.
As the proposal is developed and submitted for review to the doctoral study supervisory committee, be sure an updated doctoral study checklist is included that reflects the current version of the proposal. Each committee member should use the most current version that is embedded within MyDR, so the committee member does not need to worry about finding the most current version doctoral study checklist to communicate his or her evaluations to the student, the chairperson, and any other members of the committee. This process of ongoing evaluation and communication will continue throughout the development of the doctoral study.
Detailed content elements are specified in the checklist for each section of the doctoral study. The subsections for each section are made up of descriptions of required content for the doctoral study, specifically related to the scholarly quality and integrity of the document. Students annotate the page numbers where the required content is found within the doctoral study. This documentation serves three important functions: (1) it presents the general consensus of the Walden faculty regarding the specific content areas that should be addressed within each section of an acceptable Walden doctoral study, (2) it assists students in reflecting on areas for improvement within the document, and (3) it helps guide the committee members’ review of the documents.
A space for comments is provided for each subgroup of required content in each section. Comments provided by the supervisor committee should refer offer specific guidance for revision when needed. Additional more detailed feedback and comments will be provided by the doctoral study supervisory committee in the proposal.
The use of a doctoral study checklist is intended to provide ongoing reflection, evaluation, and reevaluation of the specific subcomponents of the proposal and doctoral study drafts. The continual review and revisions serve to ensure that the sections are developed into a comprehensive document that is internally consistent and aligned to serve the purpose of the doctoral level investigation.
For the final copy of each document (either the proposal or the doctoral study), there must be unanimous approval of the minimum standards document by the doctoral study supervisory committee, including the URR member, before the student proceeds to the oral defense (although revisions may be required following the oral defense).

Committee Review
All formal reviews of the doctoral study are conducted through Walden’s doctoral study tool named MyDR which uses the Taskstream platform.
After the chair has deemed that the doctoral study is ready, the student will submit it for SafeAssign review. After the chair has determined Turnitin compliance and believes the doctoral study is ready, the student uploads the draft checklist and SafeAssign report through Taskstream.
The committee members have 14 calendar days to review the proposal draft. Guided by the student’s annotated checklist, the committee member uses the minimum standards rubric to evaluate the proposal and uploads the review through Taskstream. The committee member may assist the chair in providing feedback to the student on revisions requested; an additional 14 calendar days are allotted to committee members for each subsequent round of revisions.

Gaining URR Approval of the Proposal
When the doctoral study proposal is approved to move forward by your supervisory committee, the chair reconciles the Minimum Standards Rubrics from each committee member and attaches the proposal document in MyDR along with the Turnitin report and the Doctoral Study Checklist. The URR receives a workflow notification to complete his or her review in MyDR.
The URR completes an initial review of the proposal using the minimum standards rubric, including items relevant to content, methodology, form and style, and ethical procedures. At this stage, the URR member can refer the student for consultation with the IRB office and/or the Writing Center to address ethical or writing concerns, respectively. The URR is obligated to make these referrals should he or she note significant ethical or writing concerns.
When the URR has requested changes, the committee works with the student to make the requested revisions. When the chair feels that the necessary revisions have been made, a revised draft is uploaded to Taskstream. The chair and member will need to review and approve the revised document. The URR member then reviews the revised materials. This process continues until the URR member approves the proposal as meeting university criteria outlined in the Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubric. At that point, the oral defense may be scheduled.

Proposal Oral Defense
The proposal oral defense may commence only after the URR has approved the proposal. The student presents the proposal via teleconference with the committee members. The URR will not participate in the proposal oral defense unless there are compelling reasons that necessitate the URR’s attendance. The proposal oral defense is a formal discussion of the proposal to identify any concerns to be addressed in the final version of the proposal or issues that may arise as the student moves forward with the doctoral study. The proposal oral defense is led by the committee chair.
Note:
Walden provides a conference call service for the proposal oral defense that is toll-free for most countries outside the United States. Students living in areas outside this coverage will be responsible for toll charges associated with this call.
The proposal oral defense must be recorded. Instructions are provided to the committee chair for starting and terminating the recording. Teleconference recordings are made public within the Walden University community; the e-mailed reservation includes instructions regarding a privacy option. Upon request, the research service specialist can e-mail a link to the recording of the conference within 72 hours of holding the call. Recordings will be archived for 30 days.
Scheduling the Proposal Oral Defense
To schedule the proposal oral defense, the student should identify several commonly available dates and times among those participating in the proposal oral defense (student and committee members). That information should be forwarded to the committee chair who will then use the Conference Call Reservation form (which is located on the Walden website) to submit the request to reserve the date and time that is convenient for the participants.
Note: Reservation forms must be submitted at least 1 week prior to the proposal oral defense date requested.
A confirmation of the request is sent to all participants with instructions for calling in at the appointed date and time. Before the call, the student should ask the chair to clarify any expectations of the content of the conference call, if necessary.
Proposal Oral Defense Outcome
After the completion of the student’s presentation, the chair and committee member will ask questions. The entire process will take between one and two hours. Once the questions have been answered, the student will be asked to hang up and call back in a few minutes so the committee can vote. The voting decisions are one of the following:
· Accepted as presented
· Accepted but requires minor revisions under the supervision of the chair
· Not accepted–requires major revisions, with committee review without another oral defense
· Not accepted–requires major revisions, with committee review and with another oral defense
If the committee determines that the proposal needs revision, the committee chair supervises these modifications. When the requested changes have been made, the chair authorizes the student to upload the updated proposal in Taskstream, which is then reviewed by the committee.
Once approved, the student may begin working on obtaining IRB approval.

Getting IRB Approval
All students who are conducting doctoral study research must get IRB approval before any research activities begin including: involve recruiting, interviewing, surveying, review of archival data, or analysis of secondary data on human subjects are required to have approval from Walden’s IRB prior to beginning their research. Students can review the IRB process on the Office of Research Ethics and Compliance section of Walden’s Center for Research Quality website.

The IRB reviews all students’ applications and determines if their proposed research complies with accepted ethical standards. Walden does not accept responsibility or liability for research conducted without the IRB’s approval, and the university will not accept or grant credit for student work where the student has failed to comply with its policies and procedures related to ethical standards in research. Note:
A repeat of the proposal review process can be required by the committee, the IRB, or the CAO at any time if ethical or pragmatic concerns necessitate substantial revisions to a URR-approved proposal.
The Purpose of the IRB
The IRB is primarily concerned with ensuring ethical practice and protection of participants in all studies, particularly those involving
· protected classes (e.g., children, elderly, prisoners, or cognitively and/or mentally impaired individuals),
· potential challenges identifying subjects or obtaining informed consent,
· deception of subjects,
· potential coercion, or
· personality, attitude, and gender preference measurements.
The IRB’s purpose is to evaluate proposed data collection methods to ensure that the risk to subjects is minimized or eliminated and that the study complies with commonly accepted ethical principles for human subject research.
The IRB’s authority is consultative to the CAO, or designee, with regard to the approval of proposed research studies.
IRB Application Process
Students may not initiate data collection or analysis of secondary data until they receive written (e-mail) notification of their approval to conduct research from the IRB. This prohibition includes recruitment of subjects; advertising, mailing, or distributing consent forms; interviewing; surveying; data gathering; and so on.
Once the URR phase has begun, each student will be individually invited via email to complete the online Form A (Description of Data Sources and Partner Sites) to obtain guidance on which forms and documentation will be needed for that study’s particular data sources and partner organization(s). The Form A instructions include a video overview with tips. Based on the student’s Form A responses, a Research Ethics Support Specialist from the IRB office will email the student a list of documents and partner organization documentation specifically required for that study’s data sources.
With support and guidance from the Research Ethics Support Specialist, the student will prepare the required documents. The IRB will then provide its Preliminary Ethics Feedback (PEF) service, sending written feedback until the materials meet the university’s ethical standards. The IRB’s goal is to help the student get ethical challenges and partner organization documentation worked out in advance to minimize the amount of correspondence and revisions needed during Step 4 (the IRB’s official ethics review of the finalized procedures, which can only occur after proposal approval).
Shortly after proposal approval is documented in MyDR, the IRB reaches out to student and chair to confirm whether any aspect of the IRB materials (partner organizations, recruitment details, data collection steps, consent form) need updating as a result of changes made during the URR or proposal defense phase.
Once the IRB receives the student’s updated documents or confirmation that no changes were made, the IRB reviews the final set of study procedures and documents. The IRB requests revisions as needed. Student may only commence recruitment and data collection once the student receives the IRB’s emailed confirmation to do so. The IRB has 10 calendar days to review each IRB submission.

Note: Data collected without IRB review and approval cannot be included in the doctoral study. Prohibited activities conducted prior to IRB approval do not fall under the legal protection of the university.
Students can find more guidance in the Doctoral Degree Coach.

Completing the Doctoral Study
After the IRB application has been approved, students can conduct their research, collect and analyze the data, report their findings, and draw their conclusions. With the guidance of their committee, students will write Sections 3 and 4 of the doctoral study, as well as the doctoral study abstract.
Required Data Storage
Students are required to maintain all raw data—interview tapes, spreadsheets, questionnaire results, and so forth—for no less than 5 years upon completion of their doctoral study. For safekeeping, store copies of data in two different locations.
Reporting the Findings
Committee guidance and requirements can vary as to the best way to report findings. Students should follow their committee members’ suggestions and requirements in presenting and analyzing the data.
As is often the case in scholarship—and most forms of writing—students must first weigh the needs of the audience and publisher with their own because no two situations are alike. Thus, when reporting their research, students should be concerned less with prescribed rules and more with (a) accuracy and integrity, (b) protection of confidential sources, and (c) ease of reading; however, students will need to adhere to rules related to APA formatting. Several common issues related to confidentiality, interviews, and participant and/or observer notes bear mentioning.
Confidentiality of Sources
Sources may or may not wish to be identified in a doctoral study. Students are obligated to notify participants and managers of research sites that all Walden doctoral studies enter the public arena. How students refer to anonymous locales and participants can vary. The reader should know the city or state—or at least the region—where the research took place.
Walden capstones typically mask the identity of the partner organization. The methodological and ethical reasons for this practice as well as criteria for exceptions are outlined here.

Students may refer to participants who wish to remain anonymous as Participant 1 or P1, by an initial, by any other logical abbreviation, or by a pseudonym. Students should inform their readers in the narrative if pseudonyms will be used throughout.
The Doctoral Degree Coach provides details and links to resources.
For more information about maintaining confidentiality, contact the IRB office at irb@mail.waldenu.edu.
Integrity and Accuracy of Participation Data
A predetermined bias by some writers leads almost invariably to selective use of quotations to support their position. However, as a scholarly researcher, students are obligated to report findings as completely, accurately, and objectively as possible, lest the integrity of the narrative be compromised. The reader expects that the speaker’s actual words are reported and portrayed in an honest context, including judicious use of blatant grammatical errors and vulgar language. Students should be prepared to negotiate with the committee and the study participants and stakeholders to determine what the word
judicious
implies.
Use an ellipsis to show that some words have been deleted or brackets to indicate that words have been changed or added. If a substantial portion of an interview is deleted or changed, paraphrase that section of the interview. Students should refer to the APA style manual for more details about maintaining the accuracy of quotations.
Committee Review
The committee chair reviews preliminary drafts of the complete doctoral study manuscript. When satisfied that the manuscript sufficiently meets university criteria, the chair authorizes the student to submit it for Turnitin review. After the chair has determined Turnitin compliance and believes the doctoral study is ready, the student uploads the doctoral study, Turnitin, and checklist to Taskstream for formal review.
Committee members have 14 calendar days to evaluate the doctoral study. Guided by the students’ annotated doctoral study checklist, a committee member uses the minimum standards rubric to share evaluations with the committee chair. Committee members may assist chairs in providing feedback to students on further revisions requested; an additional 14 calendar days are allotted to committee members for each subsequent round of revisions. The URR member, form and style editors, and CAO or CAO’s designee have 14 days (review cycle beginning the day after initial submission) to complete their review. The review cycle cannot begin until all required documents (rubrics, Turnitin reports, clean copies, etc.) are submitted. If the review takes place during any of the official Walden holidays (New Year’s Day; Martin Luther King, Jr. Day; Memorial Day; Independence Day; Labor Day; Thanksgiving Day and day after Thanksgiving; or Christmas Day), the holiday will not count in the 14-day review cycle.

Gaining URR Approval of the Doctoral Study
Informed by the student’s annotated checklist, the URR member reviews the full doctoral study (primarily focusing on Sections 3 and 4) and abstract, using the minimum standards rubric, including items relevant to content, analyses, reporting and interpreting results, form and style, abstract, and ethical issues related to reporting results. (Again, URR members can refer students for mandatory consultation with the IRB office and/or the Writing Center to address ethical or writing concerns, respectively.)
When the URR member has requested changes, the committee works with the student to make the requested revisions. When the chair feels that the necessary revisions have been made, the student can upload the revised draft to Taskstream for formal review. The chair and member will need to review and approve the revised document, prior to the URR reviewing the revised document. This process continues until the URR member approves the doctoral study. At this point, the doctoral study is ready for Form and Style review.

Form and Style Review
A doctoral study goes to form and style review before the oral defense teleconference. Once the doctoral study has been approved by the URR, the Form and Style editors will be notified to conduct the review. The editor has 14 calendar days to process the document. The 14-calendar-day review cycle begins the day after submission. Manuscripts are reviewed in the order in which they are received.
Submissions that are missing any basic required component (e.g., abstract, reference list) or that still contain editing marks may be returned by the editors as incomplete and not ready for review until the appropriate items are included and comments or edits from previous reviewers have been addressed and no tracked changes are present. In these cases, the 14-calendar-day period afforded the editor for the review will not begin until the complete and clean document is received by the editor.
The doctoral study final oral defense teleconference may not be held until after the paper has been received back from the form and style review and all revisions have been completed.
If questions concerning academic integrity arise as a result of the review, the form and style editor will contact the committee chair, URR member, and program director with his or her concerns. Please refer to the guidelines in the
Walden University Student Handbook
concerning academic integrity.

Note: Doctoral study documents must be submitted for the form and style review as a single Microsoft Word document. Form and style guidelines are found in Part 2 of this guidebook.

Doctoral Study Oral Defense
The oral defense of the final doctoral study may commence only after the form and style revisions have been completed. The student presents the final doctoral study via teleconference with the committee members. The URR will not participate in the final doctoral study oral defense unless there are compelling reasons that necessitates the URR’s attendance. The oral defense is a formal discussion of the final doctoral study to ensure that the research was carried out with integrity and that the student is able to articulate the findings and results as a scholar-practitioner. A formal discussion of the scholarly content of the doctoral study, followed by an evaluation of the doctoral study. Students may need to revise the content of the doctoral study based on discussion during the oral defense.
The oral defense is led by the committee chair.
Note:
Walden provides a conference call service for the oral defense that is toll-free for most countries outside the United States. Students living in areas outside this coverage will be responsible for toll charges associated with this call.
The final doctoral study oral defense must be recorded. Instructions are provided to the committee chair for starting and terminating the recording. Oral defense recordings are made public within the Walden University community; the e-mailed reservation includes instructions regarding a privacy option. Upon request, the research service specialist can e-mail a link to the recording of the oral defense within 72 hours of holding the call. Recordings will be archived for 30 days.
Scheduling the Oral Defense
To schedule the oral defense, the student should identify several commonly available dates and times among those participating in the oral defense (student and committee members). That information should be forwarded to the committee chair who will then use the Conference Call Reservation form (which is located on the Walden website) to submit the request to reserve the date and time that is convenient for the participants.
Note: Reservation forms must be submitted at least 1 week prior to the oral defense date requested.
A confirmation of the request is sent to all participants with instructions for calling in at the appointed date and time. Before the call, the student should ask the chair to clarify any expectations of the content of the oral defense, if necessary.
Oral Defense Outcome
After the completion of the student’s presentation, the chair and committee member will ask questions. The entire process will take between one and two hours. Once the questions have been answered, the student will be asked to hang up and call back in a few minutes so the committee can vote. The voting decisions are one of the following:
· Accepted as presented
· Accepted but requires minor revisions under the supervision of the chair
· Not accepted–requires major revisions, with committee review without another oral defense
· Not accepted–requires major revisions, with committee review and with another oral defense
If the committee determines that the final doctoral study needs revision, the committee chair supervises these modifications. When the requested changes have been made, the chair authorizes the student to upload the updated final doctoral study in Taskstream, which is then reviewed by the committee.

Students can find more guidance in the Doctoral Degree Coach.

Final Approval and Submission
Following the successful completion of the oral defense, the student will submit a clean copy of their Final Study for committee review/approval in Taskstream.
After committee approval of the final doctoral study, the URR conducts his/her final review ensuring all methodological, content, and writing issues have been addressed. In addition, the URR reviews the abstract to make sure it meets university guidelines. The URR conducts any additional reviews that are necessary until the final copy, including abstract, meets full approval. Each member of the committee indicates full final approval of the doctoral study independently by completing the Doctoral Study Quality Rubric.
After approval from the URR has been received, the university’s CAO or the CAO’s designee reviews the abstract. The CAO review takes 14 calendar days. If changes are necessary and a resubmission to the CAO is required for approval, an additional 14 calendar days are allotted to the CAO for each subsequent review.

After the university’s CAO, or designee, approves the doctoral study the student and committee will be notified via an e-mail from MyDR. The research service specialist sends the student the CAO Endorsement/Approval page. CAO approval of the doctoral study must be received by the close of business (5 p.m. Central time) on the last business day of the student’s intended term of graduation. The student can graduate in the following term if approval is received after this deadline.
ProQuest
After approval from the CAO has been communicated via e-mail, students receive instructions for online submission of their doctoral study to ProQuest. ProQuest produces microfilms of doctoral studies and publishes the abstracts online and in its monthly publication, Doctoral Study Abstracts International. To be validated for graduation from Walden University, students must submit and have their doctoral study approved to be published in ProQuest.

The research service specialist completes one last form and style check on the submitted document to ensure that it conforms to APA formatting. The doctoral study may be sent back to students for requested revisions if errors are found.
Here are some aspects of the ProQuest process that students should keep in mind:
Students may opt to have ProQuest file an application for copyright on their behalf. If students choose this option, they must note it when completing the electronic submission form.
Fees for abstract publication and copyright application are included in the Walden University student graduation and commencement fee.
For an additional fee, students may request bound copies of their doctoral study from ProQuest. Publication may take 3–6 months.
Students are notified when the Center for Research Quality formally accepts their submission to ProQuest.
Degree Validation
After the ProQuest submission is accepted, a request is sent to the Office of the Registrar (graduation@mail.waldenu.edu) to complete students’ final audits and validate their degrees. Students will know the audit is complete when they receive their final bill from the Bursar’s Office.
Students’ tuition charges stop as of the date they receive CAO approval of their doctoral study. If students receive CAO approval within the first 7 days of a term, they are not charged tuition for that term. If students receive approval later in the term, they will be charged prorated tuition.
Students who want to participate in the summer commencement ceremony must have their doctoral study approved no later than the last business day of the spring term. Students who want to participate in the winter commencement ceremony must have their doctoral study approved no later than the last business day of the fall term.
Note: Students are not automatically registered for commencement. Students who want to attend a commencement ceremony can register online.
Survey of Earned Doctorates
Upon acceptance of the ProQuest submission by the Center for Research Quality, students will receive a Survey of Earned Doctorates. They should complete this survey from the link provided in the e-mail.
The National Science Foundation and four other agencies sponsor the Survey of Earned Doctorates. The purpose of this survey is to evaluate graduate education programs at the federal, state, and university levels. By submitting the completed survey to Walden, students add to the university’s visibility among national graduate institutions. Completion of the survey is not required, but it is strongly encouraged.

Academic Integrity and Plagiarism
Walden University regards academic honesty to be essential to the entire academic enterprise and treats academic integrity violations very seriously. No student shall claim credit for another’s work or accomplishments or use another’s ideas in a written paper or presentation without appropriate attribution through proper documentation. The consequences of plagiarism and other forms of academic dishonesty, including but not limited to providing false information or altering documents submitted to the university, are discussed in the
Walden University Student Handbook
(Select Handbook from the drop-down menu, then select University Policies, and Code of Conduct).
Walden uses a service provided by SafeAssign to check manuscripts for plagiarism. Any content that may not have been cited and/or appropriately paraphrased and synthesized will be further examined and may slow completion of the doctoral study process. Please review the Walden Turnitin and Academic Integrity Online Tutorial at the Writing Center for instruction on how to identify and avoid plagiarism.
The Crediting Sources section of this guidebook provides more information regarding plagiarism. To review Walden’s official policy on plagiarism, students should visit the
Walden University Student Handbook
. Chapter 1 of the APA style manual is another resource for a detailed discussion of the ethics of scholarly writing.
Walden understands that progression through the doctoral study process can be a demanding endeavor and that students can often find themselves feeling stressed or frustrated during the doctoral study process. However, the university expects that students will continue to maintain a high level of professionalism when communicating with their committee, academic leadership, and staff. Behavior that is not consistent with the university’s expectations may result in a Code of Conduct referral. Students are encouraged to respond appropriately to constructive feedback and follow up unresolved concerns by seeking assistance from their academic leadership.

Part 2. Style: APA and Walden University
Students writing a doctoral study must use the seventh edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA style manual). Additional specific requirements for the doctoral study, above and beyond APA style, are included in this guidebook. In rare instances where Walden’s requirements conflict with the APA style manual, the university style standards prevail. These items are indicated in this guidebook by green boxes.
Students are encouraged to download the doctoral study template from the Walden Writing Center website.
The following sections are intended to supplement guidelines and instructions that appear in the doctoral study template, Doctoral Study Checklist, Doctoral Study Minimum Standards Rubric, and other information sources.

Overall Structure
The Walden doctoral study consists of the following sections, in this order:
1. Abstract title page
2. Abstract
3. Title page
4. Dedication page (optional)
5. Acknowledgments page (optional)
6. Table of contents (including list of tables and list of figures pages, if necessary; begin the pagination of the preliminary pages with i centered in the footer of the first page of the Table of Contents)
7. Body of the paper (begin the pagination with 1 in the upper right corner of the first page of Section 1; paginate consecutively on every page to the last page)
8. Reference list
9. Appendices (optional)

Abstract
Concise and well-written abstracts highlight the richness of the students’ research. A complete abstract primer can be found on Walden’s Center for Research Quality website. The following summary outlines important points to keep in mind:
Abstract Content
In the first couple of sentences of the abstract, describe the overall research problem being addressed and indicate why it is important (i.e., who would care if the problem is solved).
Note:
Students can include a general introduction of the issue in the first sentence, but they need to quickly move to a clear statement of the research problem being addressed.
Identify the purpose and theoretical foundations, if appropriate.
Summarize the key research question(s).
Concisely describe the overall research design and methods.
Identify the key results, one or two conclusions, and recommendations that capture the heart of the research.
Conclude with a statement on the implications for positive social change.
Form and Style Tips
Limit the abstract to a single paragraph, with no indentation, contained on one page.
Maintain the scholarly language used throughout the doctoral study.
Keep the abstract concise, accurate, and readable. Use correct English.
Make sure each sentence adds value to the reader’s understanding of the research.
Use the full name of any acronym and include the acronym in parentheses if it is used more than once in the abstract; students can thereafter refer to the acronym.
Do not include references or citations in the abstract.

The abstract title page is the cover page of the Walden doctoral study. It is identical to the main title page, except the word Abstract appears at the top of the page, centered.
The Walden abstract cannot exceed one page.
It is double-spaced text, in the same point size and font as the doctoral study body text, one block paragraph, and it has the same margins as the doctoral study body.
No page number appears on the abstract page.
Common Abstract Problems
The following issues could delay the approval of the abstract:
There are grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors.
Identified abbreviations have not been used more than once in the abstract.
The research problem, research question, or purpose of the study is unclear.
The question “So what?” has not been answered. Students need to indicate why the research is important. Who would care if the problem is solved?
The research methods, data analyses, and results are not adequately described.
Social change implications are inadequate or missing.
The abstract exceeds one page.

Appendices
The APA style manual addresses appendices and supplemental materials in section 2.13 (pp. 38–39) and on pages 229–230. The appendices follow the reference list. They are lettered A, B, C, and so forth. Figures and tables in the appendices are labeled A1, A2, B1, and so forth, according to the appendix in which they appear.
Note: If there is only one appendix, no letter is given.
A blank divider page is unnecessary between appendices unless it lends to readability or if a heading cannot be placed on the first page of an appendix. (Typically, this could happen when you insert a scanned document that takes up an entire page.) The materials in the appendix must not extend beyond the margins of the rest of the doctoral study: Reduce the appendix materials as needed.

Definitions of Terms and Glossaries
Many doctoral studies include a brief listing of key terms that are interpreted and clarified for the readers’ benefit. In general, students should not define a common term such as teenager (“a person between 13 and 19 years, inclusive”). They should list only ambiguous, controversial, or operational terms used throughout the doctoral study. Technical terms are usually defined in the text, if necessary. Definitions must be explicit, specific, and scholarly. More information on defining terms and further instruction on words used as words is provided below.
When defining a term, students need to determine whether the definition belongs in a list or in the text. Walden suggests the following three options for defining key terms:
List key words or phrases in a section called Definition of Terms, in the first section.
List all key terms in a glossary, in an appendix.
Define more common terms, particularly acronyms and technical terms with only immediate application for the reader, upon first usage. (Per APA 4.21, remember to italicize key terms on first usage.)
Consult the committee chair about what is most appropriate for the reader’s comprehension.
Definition Examples
Note that it is important to give proper credit to the originator of the definition.
The following examples illustrate different approaches to this issue. The first two examples might well appear in a section called Definition of Terms.

Dialects: Language varieties that initially and basically represent various geographic origins (Fishman, 1972, p. 5).
This writer might have chosen an entirely different definition, depending on how the term was used in the doctoral study.

Dialects: Differences between kinds of language that are differences of vocabulary, grammar, and punctuation (Trudgill, 1974, p. 17).
The writer might have decided, for purposes of this doctoral study, that the reader is best served by defining the term in the text, as below, rather than in a list of terms in a Definition of Terms section.
Fishman (1972) used the term dialects to mean “varieties of language that initially and basically represent divergent geographic origins” (p. 5).
Words Defined and Words Used as Words
To introduce a new, technical, or key term or label or a word used as a word, set it in italic type on first reference. After the first reference, use plain type. This use of italics most often occurs in the context of defining a word, term, or phrase:
The term networking refers to creating relationships and saving contact information for a specific situation, usually a job search.

Copyrights and Permission to Use
Copyrighting the Doctoral Study
A statement of copyright ownership to a doctoral study is not necessary because, by federal law, a copyright exists once a work is “fixed in tangible form” (APA 1.15). If students wish to add a copyright notice, place this wording at the bottom of the acknowledgments page, or if there is no acknowledgments page, on a blank page after the main title page:
© [year] by [author’s name]. All rights reserved.
Permission to Use Copyrighted Material
As discussed in APA 6.10, if copyrighted material is used in the doctoral study beyond “fair use,” written permission to reproduce the material by the copyright owner is required. To determine if something is within or beyond fair use, consider these four issues:
· The purpose and character of the use.
· The nature of the copyrighted work.
· The amount and substantiality of the portion used.
· The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work.
In Copyright and Your Doctoral Study or Thesis, ProQuest offers guidance to authors for avoiding copyright infringement. Such mistakes may include, among other potential problems, the following:
· Long quotations. There is no legal requirement, but authors should avoid long quotes in nearly all instances.
Reproduced publications. This includes standard survey instruments or questionnaires and articles, such as newspaper or magazine articles, included in an appendix.
Music or lyrics.
Graphic or pictorial works.
In general, permission to reproduce tables and figures reproduced or modified from published works not in the public domain must be demonstrated, most often by a copy of a letter of permission in an appendix (see APA 5.06). Permission to reprint is usually indicated on the first page of a copyrighted document, following the wording requested by the copyright holder.
ProQuest also reminds authors that Web-based sources are copyrighted just as print materials. That is, beyond plagiarism, be careful not to violate copyright laws by reproducing Web-based materials without permission.
Note on Copying Test Instruments, Surveys, and Questionnaires
Gaining permission to reproduce a survey instrument for participants in a study is necessary when such a document is not in the public domain. However, that is not the same as permission to reproduce it in the doctoral study. If the committee asks the student to include a published copyrighted document in the doctoral study itself, specific authorization must be obtained from the copyright holder. The authorization granting permission to reproduce must be included in an appendix. For more information on copyright law and graduate research, visit the ProQuest website.

Crediting Sources
In-Text Citations
APA style uses the author–date citation system. Authors’ names and year of publication are given within the text or at the end of block quotations. The author name may appear as part of the narrative text with the year of publication in parentheses, or both the name and year appear in parentheses, separated by a comma. These citations are reflections of items in a reference list placed at the end of the paper and arranged alphabetically by the authors’ last names and chronologically within lists of works by a single author.
Consult APA Chapter 6 for detailed instructions on how to properly credit sources.
Block Quotations
Quotations of 40 or more words must appear in a free-standing block, indented 0.5 in. from the left margin (in the same position as a new paragraph). The right margin remains the same as the rest of the text, with a ragged border. The final punctuation is at the end of the final sentence; no punctuation follows the citation at the end of the block quotation (APA 6.03). The Walden Writing Center encourages minimal use of block quotes.
Note in this example of a block quote that the left margin is indented about five spaces. There are no quotation marks, although they would be used to quote words within a block quote, such as the “hyperbolic tendencies” of a speaker. The right margin is flush with the rest of the manuscript. The first word can be capitalized even if the original is not. It is double spaced per APA sixth edition. (Taylor & Fife, 2009, p. 46)
When to Cite Page Numbers
When directly quoting an original source, use quotation marks to set off the quoted text or format it as a block quotation, as described above. Per APA 6.04, Walden strongly encourages students to provide page numbers when citing an idea or when paraphrasing. The reader will appreciate knowing the exact location of all references, and it will clarify the origination of the ideas, whether they are the author’s or from another source.
Plagiarism
As discussed in the section on Academic Integrity and Plagiarism, Walden University does not tolerate plagiarism and uses a service to detect plagiarism in student work.
In The Craft of Research (University of Chicago Press, 1995), Booth, Colomb, and Williams offered a useful definition of plagiarism:
You plagiarize even when you do credit the author but use his exact words without so indicating with quotation marks or block indentation. You also plagiarize when you use words so close to those in your source, that if your work were placed next to the source, it would be obvious that you could not have written what you did without the source at your elbow. (p. 167)
The following excerpts, based on The St. Martin’s Guide to Writing by Axelrod and Cooper (St. Martin’s Press, 2010), show the difference between plagiarism and paraphrasing.

Original

Page 172 of Guterson (2008)

Bruner (1968) and the discovery theorists have also illuminated conditions that apparently pave the way for learning. It is significant that these conditions are unique to each learner, so unique, in fact, that in many cases classrooms cannot provide them.

Plagiarism Example 1
[per Axelrod and Cooper]
Apparently, some conditions, which have been illuminated by Bruner (1968) and other discovery theorists, pave the way for people to learn.

Plagiarism Example 2

According to Guterson (2008), Bruner (1968) and other researchers have also identified circumstances that seem to ease the path to learning (p. 172).

Acceptable Paraphrase
[per Axelrod and Cooper]
Guterson (2008) wrote that the “discovery theorists” have found that certain conditions may help learning to take place. Because each individual requires different conditions, not all children can learn in the classroom (p. 172).

In Plagiarism Example 1, the student changed Guterson’s (2008) original material slightly, but there is no mention of Guterson—only Bruner (1968), whom the student did not even read firsthand.
In Example 2, Guterson is credited and so is Bruner; however, the student didn’t read Bruner. And again, the wording is almost identical to the original. Because of the conventions of documenting sources, the reader cannot distinguish who originated the ideas and words.
In the acceptable paraphrase, the student attributes the point to Guterson (2008) and changes the language more substantially. The student did not read Bruner firsthand and does not mention Bruner, so the source is clear.
Reference Lists
Note that each source in the reference list provides information on works that specifically support the doctoral study. A bibliography cites works for further reading. As such, the doctoral study requires reference lists but not bibliographies. The following information regarding references is taken from Chapters 6 and 7 of the APA style manual. Review both of these chapters thoroughly before developing a reference list. Pages 198–215 provide examples by the specific type of source and can be a helpful resource after you have read the chapters.
Some general guidance for creating a reference list is as follows:
Paginate the reference list pages.
Use the first and middle (if any) initials of all authors; do not write out the first name. Place a character space between the initials. With two or more authors, use & rather than and before the last author. Separate the names with a comma:
Foyt, A. J., & Andretti, M. P. (APA 6.27)
When a reference has up to seven authors, include all authors’ names. When a reference has eight or more authors, include the first six, then put ellipses and the last author’s name:
Zuckerman, J., King, M., Cook, A., Timmerman, B., Patterson, J., Ball, T., . . . Kubista, A. (2009).
If two or more of the works by a single author or set of authors have the same publication date, assign the dates the letters a, b, c, and so on.
For the titles of books and journal articles, capitalize only the first word of the title, the first word of the subtitle (if any), and any proper nouns. Capitalize the titles of journals in title case (APA 4.15). Italicize titles of books and journals. Do not use quotation marks around titles of journal articles.
Do not use the abbreviations Vol. and No. in reference to journals. Italicize the volume number. Indicate the issue number only if the journal is paginated separately by issue. Follow the volume with a comma and the page numbers:
American Political Science Review, 37(2), 17–32.
Do not precede page numbers of journal articles by p. or pp.
In reference lists, use U.S. postal code abbreviations for all state names.
Electronic Sources
The APA style manual (6.31–6.32) provides extensive guidance on citing sources from databases and other electronic publishers, including a discussion of the DOI system used for journal articles on the Internet. (If there is a DOI provided, you will find it somewhere on the first page of the journal article. It might appear hidden behind a database button.) References to various electronic materials are included in the Examples by Type section (pp. 198–215). See also the APA website or Walden’s Writing Center website for additional rules.

Footnotes
APA does not allow for endnotes or source footnotes. Content footnotes, used sparingly, may assist the reader. In general, however, something important enough to appear in a content footnote is important enough to appear in the narrative text.

Point of View
Appropriate use of first person is acceptable (APA p. 69), as discussed on the Writing Center website.

Verb Tense
A significant portion of the doctoral study
proposal
will be written in future tense, as shown here:
The study will address four questions.
One hundred nurses will be surveyed.
Once the study has been completed, the
doctoral study
will appear in present and past tense as appropriate.
As a general rule for social science writing, ongoing issues and current realities should be reported in present tense. What has occurred, what has been reported, and what the writer and sources have accomplished should be reported in past tense. For example, writing the statement “There were 50 states in the country” is ungrammatical and illogical since there are now 50 states in the United States. Similarly, do not write in the problem statement that “managing healthcare costs was a big problem in the United States” unless the problem no longer exists. If healthcare costs no longer are a problem, past tense works; otherwise, as an ongoing reality, this example should be described in present tense.

In the review of literature, use the past tense when reporting past research. “Jenkins (2013) observed three reasons why victims of abuse do poorly in school.” Note here that what Jenkins observed is a present tense clause. Of course, if Jenkins reported a historical fact, the entire sentence would appear in past tense: “Jenkins (2013) found four reasons that AIDS spread through the gay population in the 1980s.”
Some writers refer to past research in present tense. “Jenkins (2013) reports that there are three main reasons that victims of abuse do poorly in school.” But if this same writer decides to refer to Merton (1950) or Watson (1920), he or she will have difficulty staying consistent: “Watson (1920) argues that…” Watson is long dead and, therefore, it is awkward to report his 90-year-old research in the present tense. In fact, APA specifically requires that the literature be presented in the past tense: “Watson argued that … .”

Inclusive Language
Language used in scholarly writing should be inclusive. Most writers know the gender-restrictive nature of words like policeman, mailman, or fireman. Accordingly, writers should employ words that are not sexist and more accurately describe American society.
Some ethnicity and nationality titles require sensitivity due to historically racist usage: Oriental, American Indian, and Eskimo, for example. The APA style manual, in Chapter 3, offers an informative discussion of this issue at length (pp. 70–77). Check any of several dictionaries devoted to this subject to learn more. The director of the Walden Writing Center suggests the University of New Hampshire’s
Guidelines for the Use of Nonsexist Language
.
One of the most troublesome issues related to sexist language for writers revolves around the pronouns he and she. The combination he or she is common, if cumbersome; some readers resent he always preceding she. Some writers choose as a matter of course to use only the word he and then add a note of apology at the beginning of a manuscript. This is dated and seen as a poor solution by many readers. Some writers go back and forth between he and she—also cumbersome, but effective in certain instances.
One frequent solution is changing the singular third-person pronoun to the plural they. Thus, replace “A junior high school teacher spends much of her day just maintaining order” with “Junior high teachers spend much of their day just maintaining order.” In this example, another solution is to use the passive voice: “A junior high school teacher’s day is spent, to a large extent, maintaining order.”

Walden University’s preferred usage for groups of people whose ancestors can be traced to Africa is African American. The usage should be consistent:
African Americans make up the largest minority in America, while European Americans compose the majority.
Above all, students are asked to be sensitive to the terminology of racial, ethnic, and religious groups.

Type
A serif font such as Palatino, Century Schoolbook, Book Antiqua, or Times New Roman is required.
Do not use
Courier or New Courier. All text copy must be in the same point size: 12 point is preferred. A sans serif font, such as Arial, may be used for tables and figures if its use improves readability and format. The font size used in tables and figures may be smaller than that used in the text; however, for legibility, choose a point size no smaller than 8 points and no larger than 12 points.
The title of the doctoral study should not include chemical or mathematical formulas, symbols, superscripts, subscripts, Greek letters, or other nonstandard characters. Words must be substituted for any such characters.
Words such as those being defined on first reference and titles of books, journals, newspapers, and magazines, must appear in italics.

Line Spacing
Double-space between all text lines throughout the manuscript, including the table of contents, block quotations, and the reference list.
Double-space the text on the Acknowledgments and Dedication pages, and use regular paragraph indents.
Never use single-spacing or one-and-a-half spacing except in tables or figures.
Begin each section on a new page.
Do not begin each subsection on a new page. Subsections should follow one another immediately in order to avoid large blank spaces.
One-line widows and orphans are acceptable at the top and bottom of a page; however, for increased readability, two lines are preferred. Do not leave a heading floating at the bottom of a page without accompanying text.

Double-space lines between tables and figures and subsequent and preceding text. (See the Tables and Figures section for more information.)
End-of-line hyphenation is acceptable in the Walden doctoral study. For improved readability, avoid two consecutive end-of-line hyphenations.

Margins and Page Numbers
The Walden doctoral study template is preformatted with correct margins. The margins of the doctoral study must conform to the following guidelines. This includes the appendices, tables and figures. Set the document’s margins at these measurements:
Left margin: 1.5 in.—to allow for binding.
Right margin: 1 in.
Note:
Text at the right margin must be ragged—not justified—throughout the doctoral study.
Top margin: 1.3 in.—to allow space between page number and first line of text (see below).
Bottom margin: 1 in.
Header and footer: 1 in.
On the table of contents pages (including the list of tables and the list of figures pages), page numbers are indicated in lowercase Roman numerals placed 1 in. from the bottom of the page, centered, beginning with i on the first page of the table of contents.
Starting with the first page of Section 1, an Arabic page number must appear 1 in. from the top edge of the page and 1 in. from the right edge. The first line of text appears 0.3 in. under the page number, or 1.3 in. from the top edge of the paper. To accomplish this, set the top margin to 1.3 in. and the header to 1 in.

Note:
Some versions of Microsoft Word are defaulted to set the page number at 0.5 in. from the top edge of the paper. The margin must be changed for the Walden doctoral study.

Although manuscripts submitted to the American Psychological Association for publication must contain a brief manuscript running head, Walden doctoral studies do not have a running head.

Pages containing tables and figures may be formatted in landscape page setup. The bound margin must still be 1.5 in. Page numbers should be placed consistently with the rest of the manuscript.
Nothing can appear in the margins of the page. All page numbers, text, tables, figures, and so forth must be contained completely inside the area bounded by the margins.

Headings
Headings must be worded identically in the table of contents and the text. Do not strand a heading at the bottom of a page. Headings should not be labeled with letters or numbers.
Per APA, double-space between a subheading and the preceding text.

The sixth edition of the APA style manual does not show specifically how to format chapter headings. Walden has matched the hierarchy in the sample paper in the manual and incorporated a plain, centered Level 0 heading for chapter headings, in title case (mixed uppercase and lowercase), like this:
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study (Level 0)

Background of the Problem (Level 1)

APA’s heading levels, positions, and formats for a doctoral study with five heading levels are listed below, with the addition of Walden’s section heading (Level 0).
Centered Uppercase and Lowercase Section Heading (Level 0)

Centered Uppercase and Lowercase Heading, Bold (Level 1)

Flush Left, Uppercase and Lowercase Heading, Bold (Level 2)

Indented, bold, lowercase. (Level 3)

Indented, bold, lowercase, italics. (Level 4)

Indented, plain, lowercase, italics. (Level 5)

Lists: Seriation
Seriation refers to lists of items (APA 3.04). Two of the most important aspects of formatting lists are readability and consistency. The reader needs to keep track of the listing.
Formatting Lists in Text
For listed items within a paragraph like this (a) use letters, not numbers, in parentheses; (b) separate each item with a comma; or (c) separate each item with a semicolon, as shown in this example, if there is already a comma in one or more of the items.
When listing items vertically, use the numbered format below:
1. When listing items vertically, or breaking them out of the paragraph format, use 1., 2., 3., and so forth, and continue to double-space.
2. Indent the number the same as for a paragraph, usually 0.5 in.
Bulleted lists are formatted the same as a numbered lists. Use a bulleted list when there is no need to indicate a certain order or chronology.
Formatting Lists in Block Quotations
If copying from text that already appears in list form in the original source, determine if the entire quotation needs to be included. The text may be better served with a paraphrase. If the quotation of a list is required, indent the entire set of items in the list. By properly punctuating at the end of the text, the reader will identify this as a block quotation. Further instructions on block quotations are provided in the Crediting Sources section of this guidebook. See the example below:
Hosmer (1982) offered three statements typical of psychological egoism:
1. People always look out for No. 1 first.
2. People act so as to benefit themselves, whether or not they also benefit others.
3. People always do what they want to do, or if that is impossible, what they dislike doing the least. (p. 70)
Punctuating Lists
Properly punctuating lists is a bit of an art and a bit of a science. APA allows the use of periods at the end of items in lists, even if the item is not a complete sentence. To determine the proper punctuation, writers must consider the syntax of the introductory phrase.
Sometimes writers introduce lists with a phrase just like this:
1. End each item in a list like this with a period, even if it is not a complete sentence.
2. Item 2 in a list per APA.
3. Item 3 in a list per APA.
In the above example, the clause that introduces the list could end as a sentence. That is, the items in the list do not complete the introductory clause. In this case, end the clause with a colon, and, per APA, capitalize the first word in each numbered item, and use periods at the end of the items.
On the other hand, see this example:
Sometimes, however, writers introduce lists with a clause that concludes with
1. item 1 in a list per APA that completes the introductory clause,
2. item 2 in a list per APA that completes the introductory clause, and
3. item 3 in a list per APA that completes the introductory clause.
In this case, the three items in the list complete the introductory clause. Per APA, separate the items with commas if there are no other commas in the items or with semicolons if there are. Start each clause with a lowercase letter.

Tables and Figures
In the body of the doctoral study, information that does not appear in textual form must be formatted and labeled as either a table or figure. APA does not allow for the words graph, illustration, or chart. Refer to them as either a table or a figure. To learn how to correctly display data in tables and figures, carefully review the text and examples in APA Chapter 5. Below are a few helpful tips:
Ensure that all tables and figures fit within the margin specifications.
Do not separate a title or caption from the table or figure it identifies.
Number all tables and figures without a suffix or indicator of the section in which they appear: Table 1, Table 2, Table 3; Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, and so on. In the appendices, tables are labeled Table A1, Table B1; figures are labeled Figure A1, Figure B1, and so forth.
In the text, capitalize the word table or figure when referring to the data (e.g., see Table 12). Refer to the specific table number, not to the page number on which the table appears or to “the table below.”
Tables
Place the word Table and the table number above
the table, flush left. The title of the table appears double-spaced below the table number, flush left in italics, in title case. If the title runs over one line, single-space the two lines of the title, leaving the double-space between the table number and the first line of the title. Double-space before and after the table. Use the same font and point size for table numbers and titles as the narrative text.
Information regarding abbreviations or symbols used in a table, copyright information, and probability must be located in a note below the table. See APA 5.16 for information about formatting table notes.
Figures
Place the word Figure and the figure number under
the figure, flush left in italics. The title of the figure (which APA includes in the figure’s caption) goes next to the number in sentence case. Use the same font and point size for figure numbers and captions as the narrative text. If the figure caption exceeds one line of type, single-space the continuing line(s). In the doctoral study, do not type captions on a separate page. See APA 5.23 for more information about figure captions.

In the doctoral study, tables and figures are inserted into the narrative as close to the text that introduces them as is practical.
Do not split a table unless it is too large to fit on one entire page. Placing a table on its own landscape-oriented page is permissible. Do not place any other text on a page if a table or figure takes up three-fourths or more of the page.
The point size used in tables and figures may be smaller than that used in the text; however, for a professional appearance and legibility, type should be no smaller than 8 points and no larger than 12 points.
Grayscale (shading) and color used in figures is acceptable; however, they often will not reproduce well in black and white. Avoid color except where its use improves the presentation of data (APA 5.25). Instead, consider using crosshatching, broken lines, and so forth.

Numbers and Percentages
The APA style manual has an extensive section (4.31–4.38) dealing with the nuances of presenting numbers. Always check the manual if unsure of the proper style. Examples of APA style for numbers can be found on Walden’s Writing Center website.

Abbreviations
Here are some tips regarding commonly used abbreviations:
Lowercase should be used for Latin abbreviations, such as a.m., p.m., i.e., and e.g.
Latin abbreviations such as e.g., etc., i.e., and cf. should be used only in parenthetical materials. Use the English translation of these abbreviations in non-parenthetical material (APA 4.26). Roman, not italic, type should be used for these abbreviations. An exception is made for the term [sic], which is always italicized and set in square brackets, as shown here.
The plural of the abbreviation p. is pp. Such abbreviations are rarely used when not within parenthetical elements.
In text copy, spell out the names of states and countries. (See APA pp. 88 and 187 to learn when and how to abbreviate locations.)
United States should be written out when referred to in noun form. It is abbreviated with periods when used as an adjective: the U.S. economy (p. 88).
APA has many additional rules regarding abbreviations. See APA 4.22–4.30 and consult the index of the style manual for more information.

Spelling, Grammar, and Punctuation
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (2005) is the authority for matters of spelling in the Walden doctoral study. APA has some additional conventions regarding spelling and hyphenation (4.12–4.13) and provides guidance regarding grammar (3.18–3.23) and punctuation (4.01–4.11). Carefully reviewing these sections of the APA style manual and applying them to the doctoral study manuscript will help doctoral study reviews go more smoothly.

Following are some items to supplement the APA style manual and highlight some common errors:
1. Only standard American English is acceptable in the Walden doctoral study. Naturally, cited material from previously published sources should be left in the original form, including British or archaic spelling and excessive punctuation or lack of punctuation.
2. Do not use contractions. For example, write cannot rather than can’t and I will rather than I’ll.
3. In most cases, make the possessive form of proper names ending in s by adding an apostrophe and s: Jones’s, Grimes’s, Wilks’s, Sanchez’s. The Chicago Manual of Style notes several exceptions: Moses’, Jesus’, Xerxes’.
4. Do not add an apostrophe when forming the plural form of a number:
Most of you scored 1s and 2s.
The 1950s was a decade of great social homogenization.
5. If a compound adjective cannot be misread or if its meaning is established, a hyphen is not necessary:
covert learning conditions
day treatment program
sex role differences
grade point average
6. In general, compound adjectives that end in -ed are hyphenated when they precede the noun they are modifying:
client-centered service
group-oriented process
self-described phenomena

but

Billie is quick tempered.
7. Check the style manual for the appropriate hyphenation of combinations of words like high school, follow up, and well being (4.13) and the spelling of such words as appendices (4.12).
8. Many prefixes do not require hyphens, including anti, non, inter, intra, semi, mini, pseudo, and under. (See APA 4.13 for detailed guidance regarding hyphenation.)
9. Academic degrees are spelled as follows in lowercase, unless following a person’s name:
doctorate
doctoral degree
bachelor’s degree
master of science
master’s degree
Sam Beam, MFA
Eric Riedel, PhD
10. As discussed in APA 3.19, the subject and verb must agree in number (i.e., singular or plural). Data and media are plural nouns. (“The data were misleading, but the media were reporting the erroneous information anyway.”) Datum and medium are singular nouns.
11. Pronouns must agree in number and gender with the nouns they replace.
12. A comma must be used between items (including before and and or) in a series of three or more items (e.g., trains, planes, and automobiles).
13. No comma appears between the month and year when used alone (without an exact date), for example, December 1957.
14. Use double quotation marks for quotations. Use single quotation marks within double quotation marks only. For a quotation within a block quotation, the internal quotation gets double quotation marks. (APA 4.08)
15. Quotation marks nearly always go outside the final punctuation.
The title of the article was “A Day in High School.” One respondent noted, “My boss is a source of great joy at my job.”
but

As Hernandez (2008) observed, “Nothing is more important than financial integrity in higher education” (p. 26).
16. Use a single space after end punctuation (e.g., periods, colons).
17. The proper format for a dash (4.06) is an “em dash” or two hyphens with no space between them or on either side: like this—or–like that. This is automatic in some software programs. Other programs leave spaces around a hyphen, requiring adjustment or an override of that function: In Microsoft Word, use Tools/AutoCorrect/AutoFormat as You Type. Consult the APA style manual (p. 97) for more on dashes and hyphens.

Capitalization
The following items supplement the APA style manual’s coverage of capitalization (4.14–4.20):
1. Do not capitalize the names of job titles unless they immediately precede a person’s name.
The vice president of the United States is the second in command.
Vice President Nelson Rockefeller came from a wealthy family.
2. Do not capitalize words related to schools when they are used generically. Capitalize such words when used with the name of a school.
the junior high school
Churchill Area Senior High
this university
Walden University
Terms designating academic years are lowercase: freshman, junior.
3. Proper names associated with topographical features, geographical locations, and names of organizations are not discussed at length in APA. Walden recommends The Chicago Manual of Style’s extensive sections on such terms. In general, follow these examples:
the state of Washington; Washington State; New York State
the East Coast; the West Coast
the South; the southeastern United States
the Columbia River; the Columbia River valley
the Allegheny, the Monongahela, and the Ohio Rivers; the Mediterranean and the Caspian Seas
a senator; Senator Barbara Mikulski
the Congress; congressional; the Senate; the House
the Supreme Court; the court; juvenile court
the Democratic Party; a Democrat; communism

Sample Pages
The sample title and manuscript pages that follow are not from an actual approved doctoral study; they serve as examples for form and style purposes only. The sample abstract is from an approved 2010 doctoral study for a Ph.D. in Public Policy and Administration degree. See the doctoral study template on the Writing Center website for additional guidance.
Sample Abstract Title Page: Proposal
Abstract
The abstract title page is identical to the main title page, only it has the word Abstract at the top.
Title of the Study
by
Author Name
MA, Name of University, 2007
BS, Name of College or University, 1999
This information about previous degrees is optional on title pages.
Proposal Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of XXXXXXXXXXXX
At the proposal stage, indicate Proposal on the title page; for the final doctoral study, change the word Proposal to Doctoral Study. Include the name of the program here.

Walden University
February 2016
Include the last month of the expected graduation term.

Sample Abstract: Doctoral Study
The abstract should not exceed one page. The text must be double-spaced with no paragraph breaks. Details on writing both the proposal and final doctoral study abstract can be found in the
abstract primer
.

Abstract
Police officers are responsible for the daily task of keeping communities safe. The extent to which this goal is achieved depends in part on how the police identify, assess, and respond to community threats of violence. This task is complicated by the lack of knowledge regarding the most effective ways of handling a threat so that violence is avoided. The purpose of this research was to analyze the decision-making processes of police officers and identify both best practices and impediments in handling community threats. Street-level bureaucracy theory was the theory used for the study because it is a practical theory use for analyzing how police officers use discretion in making decisions. This quantitative study used a secondary data set from the National Police Officer survey from a county in a western U.S. state. The findings illustrated the most common threats that police officers face in the community and decisions that police officers are more like to make when arriving upon the scene of a crime. The findings will help police officers to make better decisions when confronted with community threats of violence and allow them to create safer environments for all communities.
Sample Title Page: Doctoral Study
This sample title page and the doctoral study pages that follow are not from an actual doctoral study. The student information and research are fictional, provided for example purposes only.

Absence of Television on Family Patterns, Values, and Child-Rearing Practices
by
M. G. Krebs
MA, Penn State University, 2007
BS, University of Minnesota, Duluth, 1999
Note that the committee chair’s name and signature do not appear on the doctoral study title pages. They appear on a separate approval page.
Doctoral study Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of XXXXXXXXXX
Walden University
November 2016
Include the last month of the expected graduation term.

Sample Manuscript Pages
1
Section 1: Introduction to the Study

Background of the Study

Until the age of 13, children come into contact with television more than with any other medium (Billingsley, 2012). During its first decade of widespread use in the 1950s, TV displaced radio, comic books, playmates, and babysitters as the greatest source of entertainment for children (Mondello & Whitney, 2009). On the average, television is on over 7 hours a day in American homes (Bates, 2012, p. 460). In addition to the offerings of the networks, 61% of American homes in 2010 also had access to cable television; more than 70% had a VCR (Bissell-Turner, 2012b). Bates (2009) noted that “more than 98% of all households own at least one TV and that the average child between the ages of 2 and 5 spends over 25 hours a week in front of the TV set” (p. 144).
At least in part as a response to this overwhelming contact with the television tube, several authors of popular literature have warned parents of the perils of television, and in two cases proposed either the total or temporary elimination of television from people’s lives. Mander (1978) suggested in his Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television that television, for the most part, cannot be completely blamed for all the . . . .
(Manuscript page examples continue.)

3
Effects of Television on Children
A meta-analysis by Foster, Rogers, and Hensler (2010) debunked nine common assumptions of television effects, including that television mesmerizes children and that they are not cognitively active during viewing. Foster et al. concluded:
That there is an association between viewing violence on television and aggressive behavior among some children is clear. Yet despite all of the research that has been done, we cannot wholeheartedly state that viewing violence in itself necessarily leads to violence or aggression—or, for that matter, that viewing television in itself creates or distorts deeply held values. (p. 192)
Sexism on the screen. Doright (2008) studied Saturday morning television and found that male characters outnumber female characters by a 5:1 margin and that females were more likely to be seen as victims by young viewers (see Table 2). Fudd (2013) concluded . . . .
60
45
30
15
0
Male hero Female hero Male victim Female victim

Figure 2. Incidence of sex role identifiers on Saturday morning television. From “Saturday Morning Sex” by D. Doright, 2008, Popular Media, 4, p. 198. Copyright by PMStudies, Inc. Adapted with permission of the author.

Note that the doctoral study writer had permission to use the figure and cited that permission under the figure. Copyright permission must be sought for the doctoral study but not for the proposal.

Part 3: Frequently Asked Questions
This section of the Doctoral Study Guidebook contains some typical questions asked by doctoral students while in the process.

Questions About the Doctoral Study Process
How am I assigned my doctoral study supervisory committee?
Students in the DHA program are matched with their doctoral study supervisory chair and committee member based on their topic and research methodology
How do I set up a teleconference for my oral defense? How much does it cost?
To schedule the oral defense, the student should identify several commonly available dates and times among those participating in the oral defense (student and committee members). That information should be forwarded to the committee chair who will then use the Conference Call Reservation form (which is located on the Walden website) to submit the request to reserve the date and time that is convenient for the participants.
Note: Reservation forms must be submitted at least 1 week prior to the oral defense date requested.
The conference line and recording service are provided for you free of charge. International toll-free phone numbers may be available.
Note:
Walden provides a conference call service for the oral defense that is toll-free for most countries outside the United States. Students living in areas outside this coverage will be responsible for toll charges associated with this call.
At what point does tuition stop?
Tuition stops when your doctoral study is approved by the CAO (or designee). If you receive approval within the first 7 days of a term, you are not charged tuition for that term. If you receive approval later in the term, you will be charged prorated tuition.
My doctoral study has been approved. When is my official graduation date?
Graduation dates fall at the end of the term. Your official graduation date will be the end of the term in which you finish your degree. You are finished when all prerequisites are met; your doctoral study is written, approved, and accepted by ProQuest for publishing; and your tuition is paid in full. You must have officially graduated before you can attend graduation ceremony in either the winter or summer.
When can I refer to myself as a “doctoral candidate”?
You may use the designation “doctoral candidate” after you have completed all the expectations for doctoral candidacy, including completing all required coursework and the core research sequence, successfully completing your two academic residencies, and having an approved prospectus after rubric review on file with the Center for Research Quality.
When can I use the title Dr. or DHA?
You may use the doctoral title only after your degree has been validated. You will receive confirmation from graduation@mail.waldenu.edu that your degree audit has been completed.
If I want to participate in the commencement ceremony, when must my doctoral study be approved?
Your doctoral study must be approved by the CAO (or designee) no later than the last business day of the spring term to participate in the summer commencement ceremony or the last business day of the fall term to participate in the winter commencement ceremony. You are not automatically registered for commencement; to attend a commencement ceremony, register online.

Questions About Form and Style
See the Form and Style Website
Doctoral Study Guidebook (October 2020) Page ii

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Amanda Smith ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer

Hire a Writer

Client Reviews

4.9

Sitejabber

4.6

Trustpilot

4.8

Our Guarantees

100% Confidentiality

Information about customers is confidential and never disclosed to third parties.

Original Writing

We complete all papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report.

Timely Delivery

No missed deadlines – 97% of assignments are completed in time.

Money Back

If you're confident that a writer didn't follow your order details, ask for a refund.

New to Your Trusted Assignment Help Service? Sign up & Save

Calculate the price of your order

Type of paper needed:

Pages:

You will get a personal manager and a discount.

Academic level:

We'll send you the first draft for approval by at

Total price:

$0.00

Power up Your Academic Success with the
Team of Professionals. We’ve Got Your Back.

Power up Your Study Success with Experts We’ve Got Your Back.

Order Now Order Now