Search results

While known by many names, qualifying exams function as gatekeepers to graduate student advancement to PhD candidacy, yet there has been little formal study on best qualifying exam practices particularly in biomedical and related STEM PhD programs. The purpose of this study is to examine the current state of qualifying exams through an examination of the literature and exploration of university-wide policies.

The authors conducted a literature review of studies on qualifying exams and completed an external evaluation of peer institutions’ and internal institutional qualifying exam requirements to inform our discussion of qualifying exams practices in PhD training at a research-intensive US institutions.

This study identified the need for more research on qualifying exams to establish evidence-based best practices. The authors found a wide variety of qualifying exam formats, with little evidence in support for specific formats. The authors also found little evidence that student expectations are made clear. The lack of evidence-based best practices coupled with insufficient clarity for students has a real potential to disadvantage PhD students, particularly first generation, underrepresented minority, international and/or other trainees who are not privileged or socialized to navigate training environments with vague landmarks such as the qualifying exams.

There are very few studies that evaluate qualifying exams in US doctoral education, particularly in STEM fields, and to the authors’ knowledge, there has been no analysis of campus-wide policies on qualifying exams reported. The lack of evidence for best practices and the need for to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of qualifying exams are discussed.

This paper empirically addresses the effect of coercive, normative and mimetic pressures on sustainability results, focussing on the three dimensions of the triple bottom line approach: environmental, economic and social. The mediating role of compliance, analyser or proactive corporate strategies towards sustainability is also considered.

The hypotheses developed in this study were tested using data from a sample of private companies from two industries: manufacture of chemicals and chemical products, and manufacture of basic metals.

The results confirm the role played by institutional pressures for sustainability in explaining the involvement of organisations in economic, social and environmental aspects. The mediating effect of corporate strategy is also confirmed, although only for environmental aspects.

Research into sustainability development is evolving rapidly; however, few studies have explored its diffusion amongst organisations from a triple bottom line perspective by considering the role of different current external pressures, the corporate strategy and the diverse results.

本研究擬對強制壓力、規範壓力和模仿壓力對可持續性成果的影響進行實證研究。研究的焦點放在三重底線法的三個層面上,即是環境層面、經濟層面和社會層面。研究人員亦探討尋求可持續性的承諾、分析儀和積極主動的公司戰略的中介作用。

研究人員測試其建立的各項假設; 使用的數據取自兩個企業的私人公司的樣本,它們是製造化學品和化學產品的企業,以及製造基本金屬的企業。

研究結果確認了尋求可持續性所帶來的制度壓力,在解說企業於經濟、社會和環境三方面的參與上所扮演的角色。研究結果亦確認了公司戰略的中介作用,唯這只見於環境的層面上。

探討可持續性發展的學術研究發展迅速,唯當中較少從三個基本的角度去探討可持續性發展在組織內的傳播; 本研究考慮了目前各種外來壓力、公司戰略和不同的結果所扮演的角色,以彌補這研究差距。