An Investigation of Doctoral Dissertation Abstracts Written Between 2010-2017 in Turkey

Abstract

The purpose of this study, which is a case study based on the qualitative research model, is to examine the appropriateness of the doctoral dissertation abstracts written between 2010 and 2017. For this purpose, 3463 doctoral dissertation abstracts, written in education, were accessed through the website of The National Thesis Center of Turkey by using the "advanced search" option based on predefined criteria. No sampling method was used in the research, and all the dissertations in the field of interest were accessed. To examine the dissertation abstracts, an abstract review form was developed by the researchers, and after receiving the view of the experts, fifty dissertation abstracts were examined in collaboration with 5 researchers to ensure compatibility and clarity. The form was finalized after the joint review/evaluation. Each dissertation abstract was examined independently by two different experts. The differences in the two expert reviewers’ opinions were also revised by a third expert, and the final decision was made on the abstract. A descriptive statistical analysis was conducted on the data collected by the dissertation abstract form. While it was found that almost all of them included aims and findings presented in an academic tone, they did not mention the sampling and data collection tools. However, a number of abstracts were included data collection and sampling methods, and also, a limited amount of reference and abbreviation was used. Along with these findings, it was also found that the number of doctoral dissertations did not differ significantly over the years. In line with these findings, it was concluded that Turkey has gender equality in education opportunities, and there is a lack of information regarding the information on the method of dissertation abstract. The differences in the Ph.D. dissertation abstracts, not only between university programs but also within the universities in Turkey, make it difficult to obtain an idea of the dissertations. In the dissertation writing guides of the institutes, it is suggested that the dissertation abstracts should be expressed in a new common national template by considering the required qualifications.

Keywords

• postgraduate
• abstract
• abstract writing
• doctoral dissertation

References

1. Aktaş, E. ve Uzuner Yurt, S. (2015). Türkçe eğitimi alanındaki makale özetlerine yönelik bir içerik analizi, Turkish Studies, 10 (7), 73-96.
2. Berkenkotter, C. and Huckin, T. N. (1995). News value in scientific journal articles. Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: Cognition/culture/power, 27-44.
3. Bhatia, V. K. and Genre, A. (1993). Language use in professional settings. Applied Linguistics and Language Study. London: Longman. Brett, P. (1994). A genre analysis of the results section of sociology articles. English for Specific Purposes, 13(1), 47-59.
4. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç, Ç. E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri (2.Basım). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
5. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2017). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Pegem Atıf İndeksi, 1-360.
6. Catalyst. (2019). Women in Academia: Quick Take - Catalyst. [online] Available at: https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-in-academia/ [Accessed 11 Nov. 2019]
7. Chan, S. K. and Foo S.B., Schubert (2000). “Writing Abstracts for Scholarly Communication by Asian ESL Research Scholars: Preliminary Findings”. Presented at Research and Practice in Professional Discourse Conference. City University. Hong Kong.
8. Chan, S. K. and Foo, S. (2001). Bridging the interdisciplinary gap in abstract writing for scholarly communication. GENRE 2001 (Genres and Discourse in Education, Work and Cultural Life: Encounters of Academic Disciplines on Theories and Practices).

9. Day, R. A. (2000). Bir Bilimsel Makale Nasıl Yazılır ve Yayımlanır? (Çev. Gülay, Aşkar Altay). Ankara: TÜBİTAK Yayınları.
10. [CHE] Councils of Higher Education (2016).
11. http://www.yok.gov.tr/documents/10279/29921725/100_2000_YOK_Doktora_Burslari_Kitapcigi.pdf/ adresinden Erişim Tarihi:17.09.2018 . [CHE] Councils of Higher Education (2018). 100/200 YÖK doktora bursları. From: https://www.yok.gov.tr/Documents/Yayinlar/Yayinlarimiz/2019/100_2000_YOK_Doktora_Burslari_Nisan_2018.pdf Erişim Tarihi:17.09.2018 .
12. [CHE] Councils of Higher Education (2019). https://istatistik.yok.gov.tr/adresinden 17.01.2019 .
13. Dos Santos, M. B. (1996). The textual organization of research paper abstracts in applied linguistics. Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 16(4), 481-500.
14. Dronberger, G. B. and Kowitz, G. T. (1975). Abstract readability as a factor in information systems. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 26(2), 108-111.
15. Fidel, R. (1986). Writing Abstracts for Free‐Text Searching. Journal Of Documentation, 42(1), 11-21.
16. European Union (2013). She Figures 2012 Gender in Research and Innovation–Statistics and Indicators. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
17. Fidel, R. (1986). Writing Abstracts for Free‐Text Searching. Journal Of Documentation, 42(1), 11-21.
18. Hall, G. M. (2013). Structure of a scientific paper. How to write a paper, 3, 1-5.
19. Holmes, L. (1997). Post-communism: An introduction. Duke Univ Pr.
20. Hopkins, A. and Dudley-Evans, T. (1988). A genre-based investigation of the discussion sections in articles and dissertations. English For Specific Purposes, 7(2), 113-121.
21. Hovy, E. and Lin, C. Y., (1999). Automated Text Summarization in SUMMARIST. In Inderjeet Mani and Mark Marbury, editors, Advances in Automatic Text Summarization, MIT Press.
22. Hyland, K. (2000). Praise and criticism: interactions in book reviews. Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing, 41-62.
23. Keogh, T. J. (1994). The Structure of Abstracts: Stylistic and Structural Elements in 48 Scientific and Technical Abstracts.
24. Karadeniz Technical University [KTÜ], (2004). Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Tez Yazım Kılavuzu.
25. Özbilgin, M. and Healy, G. (2004). The gendered nature of career development of university professors: The case of Turkey. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64(2), 358-371.
26. Pinto, M. and Lancaster, F. W. (1999). Abstracts and abstracting in knowledge discovery.
27. Salager-Meyer, F. (1990). Discoursal flaws in medical English abstracts: A genre analysis perresearch-and text-type. Text-Interdisciplinary journal for the study of discourse, 10(4), 365-384.
28. Swales, J. (1981) Aspects of article introductions. Birmingham, UK: The University of Aston, Language Studies Unit.
29. Swales, J. (1985). Episodes in ESP: A source and reference book on the development of English for science and technology (Vol. 1). Pergamon.
30. Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Swales, J. (2004). Research Genres. New York: Cambridge University Press.
32. Tavşancıl, E., Çokluk, Ö., Çıtak, G. G., Kezer, F., Yıldırım, Ö. Y., Bilican, S. et al. (2010). Eğitim bilimleri enstitülerinde tamamlanmış lisansüstü tezlerin incelenmesi (2000–2008). Ankara Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projesi Kesin Raporu. Retrived May 11, 2012, from acikarsiv.ankara.edu.tr/browse/6199/ Binder1.pdf.
33. Tenopir, C. (1985). Full Text Database Retrieval Performance. Online Review, 9(2), 149- 164.
34. [TSI] Turkish Statistical Institute (2017). İstatistiklerle Kadın.
35. Ülker, M. E. (2012). A Comparative Analysis of Thesis Guidelines and Master Thesis Abstracts Written in English at Universities in Turkey and in the USA. Master Thesis, Graduate School of Social Sciences, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
36. U.S. Census Bureau. (2019, May 23). Number of People With Master's and Doctoral Degrees Doubles Since 2000. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/02/number-of-people-with-masters-and-phd-degrees-double-since-2000.html.
37. Williams, I. A. (1999). Results section of medical research articles: analysis of rhetorical categories for pedagogical purposes. English for Specific Purposes, 18(4), 347–366.
38. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. (6.basım) Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
39. Yin, R. K. (1994). Discovering the future of the case study. Method in evaluation research. Evaluation practice, 15(3), 283-290.
40. Ph.D Study in the USA - A Guide for 2020. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.findaphd.com/study-abroad/america/phd-study-in-usa.aspx