Volume 15, Issue 4 (2024)
Res Med Edu 2024, 15(4): 42-54 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Samouei R, Ashrafi-rizi H, Soleymani M R, Yamani N, Kazempour Z. Identifying the Challenges and Appropriate Solutions for Holding Comprehensive Exam for PhD Students in the Medical Sciences Universities: a Qualitative Research. Res Med Edu 2024; 15 (4) :42-54
URL: http://rme.gums.ac.ir/article-1-1354-en.html
URL: http://rme.gums.ac.ir/article-1-1354-en.html
Medical Library and Information Science Department, Health Information Technology Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran , hassanashrafi@mng.mui.ac.ir
Abstract: (628 Views)
Introduction: The evaluation of Ph.D. students is one of the main parts of their curriculum, and the comprehensive exam is held with the aim of evaluating the abilities acquired in the educational stage and verifying the qualification and ability to carry out research activities. The purpose of this research is to identify the challenges of holding the comprehensive exam of Ph.D students in the medical sciences universities (Iran) and to provide appropriate suggestions.
Methods: The research approach was qualitative and the research method was conventional content analysis (inductive) and the type of study was applied. Participants included the members of the board of examiners in each specialized field with different positions and degrees, Ph.D. students who passed the comprehensive exam, as well as educational staffs in the 7th area of health education like Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Yazd University of Medical Sciences and Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences. Sampling was Purposive and heterogeneous with maximum diversity to obtain different views. In the present study, after 17 interviews, no new data was obtained; however, to be sure, 3 other participants were also interviewed (20 participants). Graneheim and Lundman's 5-stage model was used for data analysis, and Lincoln and Guba criteria were used to measure the trustworthiness of data.
Result: The data were classified in 41 codes, 9 subcategories and 3 main categories in the challenges section and in 48 codes, 13 subcategories and 3 main categories in the solutions section. The main concepts about the challenges of conducting a comprehensive Ph.D. exam including macro-policy and planning, the limitations of laws and weak planning, and the problems of the people involved in the exam, as well as the main concepts about the solutions to optimize the conduct of a comprehensive Ph.D exam, including solutions before entering students for the Ph.D course, the solutions related to the comprehensive exam, and the solutions related to the duration of the Ph.D course.
Conclusion: The challenges of holding a comprehensive exam for Ph.D students in health are multifaceted and require a comprehensive approach to address them. By carefully paying attention to these challenges and implementing solutions at the micro and macro levels, the educational system can better achieve the main mission and goal of holding the comprehensive and at the same time evaluate the students' readiness to enter the research course more accurately.
Methods: The research approach was qualitative and the research method was conventional content analysis (inductive) and the type of study was applied. Participants included the members of the board of examiners in each specialized field with different positions and degrees, Ph.D. students who passed the comprehensive exam, as well as educational staffs in the 7th area of health education like Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Yazd University of Medical Sciences and Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences. Sampling was Purposive and heterogeneous with maximum diversity to obtain different views. In the present study, after 17 interviews, no new data was obtained; however, to be sure, 3 other participants were also interviewed (20 participants). Graneheim and Lundman's 5-stage model was used for data analysis, and Lincoln and Guba criteria were used to measure the trustworthiness of data.
Result: The data were classified in 41 codes, 9 subcategories and 3 main categories in the challenges section and in 48 codes, 13 subcategories and 3 main categories in the solutions section. The main concepts about the challenges of conducting a comprehensive Ph.D. exam including macro-policy and planning, the limitations of laws and weak planning, and the problems of the people involved in the exam, as well as the main concepts about the solutions to optimize the conduct of a comprehensive Ph.D exam, including solutions before entering students for the Ph.D course, the solutions related to the comprehensive exam, and the solutions related to the duration of the Ph.D course.
Conclusion: The challenges of holding a comprehensive exam for Ph.D students in health are multifaceted and require a comprehensive approach to address them. By carefully paying attention to these challenges and implementing solutions at the micro and macro levels, the educational system can better achieve the main mission and goal of holding the comprehensive and at the same time evaluate the students' readiness to enter the research course more accurately.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
assessment and evaluation
References
1. Rajaee A.[Pathology of higher education policy making in Iran]. ihej 2023; 14 (3): 20-30. [Persian]
2. Khosravi M, Hassani M, Mohajeran B.[Identifying the components of the model of recruitment and effectiveness of higher education management graduates in the governance system of higher education in Iran]. Higher Education Letter 2022; 15(58): 127-60. [Persian]
3. Rahmanpour M, Hosseini M, Nasr A. [Satisfaction Rate of Assessment Strategies of Learning Outcomes in the Graduate Curriculum Viewpoint of Professors and Students: A Case Study of University of Isfahan]. AJHEL 2018; 11(43): 25-48. [Persian]
4. Liu S, Liu S. Higher education quality assessment and university change: A theoretical approach. Quality Assurance and Institutional Transformation 2016:15-46. [DOI:10.1007/978-981-10-0789-7_2]
5. Jalili M, Khabaz Mafinejad M, Gandomkar R, Mortaz Hejri S. [Principles and methods of student assessment in health professions].Tehran: Iranian Academy of Medical Sciences; 2017 [Persian]
6. Pereira D, Flores MA, Niklasson L. Education EiH. Assessment revisited: a review of research in Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 2016; 41(7): 1008-32. [DOI:10.1080/02602938.2015.1055233]
7. Borzou SR, Oshvandi K, Cheraghi F, Moayed MS. [Comparative study of nursing PhD education system and curriculum in Iran and John Hopkins school of nursing]. Education Strategies in Medical Sciences 2016; 9(3): 194-205. [Persian]
8. UNC School of Education. Ph.D in Education Handbook January 2023. [Cited 2023 Nov 12]. Available from: https://ed.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/SOE-Doctoral-Handbook-FINAL-January-2023-1.pdf
9. Old Dominion University. Student Guide: The Ph.D. Comprehensive Examination. [Cited 2023 Nov 12]. Available from: https://ww1.odu.edu/intlstudies/gpis/resources/student-guide-phd-comprehensive-examination.
10. Wood P. Contemplating the value of comprehensive exams: Do they have a role in a radical agenda for reimagining the PhD in the neoliberal university?. Geojournal 2015; 80(20): 225-9. [DOI:10.1007/s10708-014-9582-6]
11. Camacho A. A Comprehensive Exam as an Improvement Tool to Increase the Board of Registry Exam Application and Performance 2018; 150: S84. [DOI:10.1093/ajcp/aqy095.203]
12. McGee RW. Let's Eliminate Comprehensive Exams: An Application of Economic and Ethical Theory to a Practical Issue. [Cited 2023 Nov 14]. Available from: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=242344
13. Lindquist JL, Wortman SE, Francis C. Adding value to graduate education: the comprehensive examination. NACTA Journal 2011:105-107.
14. Farokhi F, Golmakani N, Tafazoli M.[Attitude of Undergraduate Midwifery Students about Final Comprehensive Exam in Mashhad Nursing and Midwifery School]. Iranian Journal of Medical Education 2011; 10 (4) :410-416 [Persian]
15. Memarian B, Gollish S, Moozeh K, Gerrard D, Tihanyi D, Costa SA, editors. [Comprehensive exam variations and experiences of doctoral candidates in engineering]. ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition; 2019 Jun 15; 2019. [Persian]
16. Allard E, Leclerc-Loiselle J, Lavallée A, Vinette B, Larue CJNEiP. PhD nursing students' changing needs relative to the comprehensive doctoral examination 2021;50:102917. [DOI:10.1016/j.nepr.2020.102917]
17. Asghari F, Nemati MAJJoICR. [The challenge of the quality of PhD thesis in Iran (based on the concept of value Chain)]. Journal of Iranian Cultural Research 2016; 9(2): 159-91.[Persian]
18. Abdi Shahshahani M, Ehsanpour S, Yamani N, Kohan S, Dehghani ZJIJoME. The Development and Validation of an Instrument to Evaluate Reproductive Health PhD Program in Iran Based on CIPP Evaluation Model. IJME 2014; 14 (3):252-64. [Persian]
19. Graneheim UH, Lindgren BM, Lundman B. Methodological challenges in qualitative content analysis: A discussion paper 2017; 56: 29-34. [DOI:10.1016/j.nedt.2017.06.002]
20. Polit DF, Beck CT. Essentials of nursing research: Appraising evidence for nursing practice: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
