Research Experiences

Research experience is a critical element of the student's doctoral program. Doctoral students are expected to be actively involved in research each semester they are enrolled in the university. There are two components of the research experience (1) completion of analytic paper and (2) completion of at least two research projects. These requirements are considered the minimum experiences.

Students are required to complete an analytic paper, presented for review and approval by the Advisory Committee. It is recommended that the focus of this paper be theory or a critical review during the first year of doctoral study. However, the exact nature and timing of the assignment will be at the discretion of the Advisory Committee.

In addition to the analytic paper, students must also plan and conduct a minimum of two research projects under the supervision of at least two different mentors. A project proposal should be approved by the project/faculty mentor prior to initiation. In accordance with UT policy, the student must receive IRB approval before initiating any research project. It is expected that these projects will involve development of a research design, data collection and analysis, and will be reported in journal article format in APA style. The reports summarizing the results of these studies should be of publishable quality and must be approved by the Advisory Committee.

It is expected that some or all of these papers will be submitted to juried research conferences and/or peer-reviewed journals, but this is not a requirement to meet this competency. It is a requirement, however, that present ONE of the two research projects at a CSD Friday Research Colloquium. Each of the other two required papers will be discussed, at separate times, in oral defense format before the student's Advisory Committee. The first part of each of these meetings will be open to other members of the departmental community (other doctoral students are particularly urged to attend), and will consist of a presentation and questions from the committee and the audience. The second part will be closed to the public; the student will defend his/her work before the committee. The committee will then deliberate privately to determine whether the work is considered acceptable, and if not, to formulate recommendations for improvement and later resubmission for approval.