2.3 The qualitative dissertation: still hazy after all these years  (Page 8/14)

Jane came to me in a committee change midstream in her dissertation when her chair accepted a position at another university. At the proposal preparation stage and technically not far enough along to justify her chair completing the dissertation from afar, she was understandably anxious. She seemed to experience the change as a loss. She and the previous chair had been committed to an interview and observation study of study of organizational change, but the design of the study remained hazy even though they had been working on it for several months. The previous chair’s and my styles differed, and it became clear that I gave feedback in a more direct and detailed way than the student was accustomed to receiving. I also seemed to schedule my time more succinctly allowing about 30 to 45 minutes in biweekly sessions with doctoral students unless there were compelling reasons to meet for longer or to meet less often. From my view, it kept students on track to meet regularly. After two or three decide which meetings to discuss the study design and finalize the proposal, the student appeared at my door around lunch time and wanted to meet with me, unannounced. I had planned to join two colleagues for a work session over lunch, which I am sure appeared to the student like a social rather than a professional meeting. When I suggested that the student return later in the afternoon at a time when my schedule was open, she began to cry. I told my colleagues to proceed without me and returned to the office to meet with the student. Hence, I learned about her feelings of loss about the previous chair and that they would often meet for a couple of hours weekly to discuss the dissertation. Even though we had made more significant progress on the task, the relationship had been neglected in her view.

I share this story as an illustration of the sensitive nature of the relationship between chair and student. That relationship has been characterized in many ways:

Unlike many experts, I advise doctoral candidates to make their selection based on matching personal styles rather than trying to find the greatest expert in the field. The advisor-advisee relationship can become as intense as any family relationship. Some advising relationships are more like parent-child relationships; whereas, others are more like a marriage, more cooperative, and are more mutually satisfying. Divorce, of course, is always possible, but costly, both emotionally, and in terms of time and money. So I advise a period of courtship before you make any final commitment about your advisor. (Jenson, 2007, p. 1)

Even when the committee and the chair are well meaning, tensions and perceptions can cloud the relationship. For the purposes here, I will assume that the committee and the chair are advocates for the student’s success and that it is ultimately in the best interest of the committee and the university to graduate doctoral students. Truly, it is in the best interest of the faculty to produce successful graduates.