Doctoral Study Process Checklist: Student Chair Second Committee Member URR

1
JANUARY 2012

Doctoral Study Process Checklist
Students are encouraged to follow this checklist closely and work with their assigned faculty to
ensure all steps are followed to expedite completion.

Most documents for the Doctoral Study process can be found on the Research Centers website:
http://researchcenter.waldenu.edu/ primarily in the Forms and IRB sections. Ensure the current
version is used by looking at the date in the footer

Roles and Stakeholders:

Student Owner of the process checklist and candidate for the DBA degree.
Chair Assigned to the student at the beginning of DDBA-8100. Part of the students
committee.
Second Committee Member assigned to the committee at the beginning of DDBA-8100.
Part of the students committee.
URR University Research Reviewer assigned to the committee at the beginning of
DDBA-8100. Dual role serves as committee member and as representative of Walden
University to ensure scholarly standards are achieved.
dbamethodologist@waldenu.edu - group mailbox for core faculty DBA Methodologist.
Validates academic quality standards, including mapping to the rubric, content alignment,
design, methodology, formatting, grammar, and APA are in compliance and meet the
academic standards of the DBA program and Walden University. validate
somdocadvising@waldenu.edu group mailbox for the School of Management DBA
academic advisors.
dbaprospectuschairselection@waldenu.edu group mailbox for the assignment of student
committees.
dbaprogramdirector@waldenu.edu group mailbox for the DBA Program Director.
cmtadmin@waldenu.edu - group mailbox of the College of Management and Technology
administration.
dba.docstudy@waldenu.edu group mailbox of the Research Center at the university level
that is used to monitor movement of doctoral study proposals and studies between the DBA
program and university level reviewers. Only use this address when requesting a URR,
Form and Style, or CAO review.
freda.turner@waldenu.edu DBA Program Director
fred.walker@waldenu.edu - DBA Doctoral Study Administrator

2

JANUARY 2012

Ground Rules

All e-mails in this process should follow the e-mail subject line naming convention as
outlined on page 4.

All E-mails must start with the following identification:

Student:
Chair:
Second Committee Member:
URR:

All requests for reviews must be clearly spelled out, indicating who is requesting, who is
requested to review, date of the request, and deadline for the review, and request for
acknowledgement. Example:

E-Mail Subject line: Armstrong_N_2.1_03092023_Chair_to_Second

Student: Neil Armstrong
Chair: Buffalo Bill
Second Committee Member: Jane Austin
URR: Ralph Nadar

Dear Dr. Austin,

As Chair, I am requesting your review as second committee member of [students name]
proposal.
Attached, please find:

A clean copy of the proposal
Copy of the Turnitin Report
Copy of the Chair completed rubric

You have 14 calendar days to complete your review (although less time is always appreciated
by the student), which would make the deadline March 22, 20XX. Please reply to all me
acknowledging that you have received the documents and will complete the review on or
before the deadline date.

Note that the day you e-mail the request counts as the first day.
3

JANUARY 2012

Step 1: Request Doctoral Study Faculty Chair in DDBA-8990 / DDBA-8991

1a - Student - contact faculty of interest by checking the Available Faculty for
Chair/Committees document located at http://researchcenter.waldenu.edu/ After communicating
with faculty of interest, submit the Chair Request Form during Week 2 of DDBA-8990 or
DDBA-8991 to:

somdocadvising@waldenu.edu
dbaprospectuschairselection@waldenu.edu

Those students who do not submit a form will be assigned a Committee based on methodology
(if known) and/or specialization. The data in the Chair Request Form will be checked for
accuracy. Chair Request Forms with errors will be returned to the student.

1b - DBA Program Director - will approve committee assignments by week 8 of DDBA-8990
or DDBA-8991, including the effective date to:

cmtadmin@waldenu.edu
dba.docstudy@waldenu.edu

1c - CMT Administration - student and faculty receive confirmation of Chair assignment
during week 8 of DDBA-8990 / DDBA-8991.

1d - Student if not received confirmation of committee assignment by day 4 of the 8th week of
DDBA-8990 / DDBA-8991, should follow up with:

dbaprospectuschairselection@waldenu.edu

4

JANUARY 2012

Proposal & Doctoral Study
File Name and E-Mail Naming Convention
Process
(Proposal)
1
Process
(Proposal)
2
Process
(Proposal)
3
Process
(Proposal)
4
Process
(Doctoral
Study)
5
Process
(Doctoral
Study)
6
Process
(Doctoral
Study)
7
Process
(Doctoral
Study)
8
Student
Chair
Chair
Second
Chair
Methodologist
Chair
URR
Student
Chair
Chair
Second
Chair
Methodologist
Chair
URR
Student to
Chair
1.1
Chair to
Student
1.2
Chair to
Second
2.1
Second to
Chair
2.2
Chair to
Methodologist
3.1
Methodologist
to Chair
3.2
Chair to URR
4.1
URR to Chair
4.2
Student to
Chair
5.1
Chair to
Student
5.2
Chair to
Second
6.1
Second to
Chair
6.2
Chair to
Methodologist
7.1
Methodologist
to Chair
7.2
Chair to URR
8.1
URR to Chair
8.2
File Name Format:
Last Name_ First Initial_ Document_ Date
File Name Examples:
Armstrong_N_Proposal_03092012
Armstrong_N_Doctoral_Study_03092012
E-Mail Subject Line Format:
Last Name_First Initial_Document_Process_Step_Date_Direction
E-Mail Subject Line Examples:
Armstrong_N_Proposal_2.1_03092012_Chair_to_Second
Armstrong_N_Doctoral_Study_7.2_03092012_Methodologist_to_C
hair
I
Step 2: DDBA-8100
5

JANUARY 2012

2a - Student - work with assigned Chair in DDBA-8100 while working in parallel to complete
DDBA-8437 /DDBA-8438 and required specialization courses. Students should ensure the
problem/purpose statement and research question map to the rubric. Please follow the DDBA-
8100 course syllabus and Chair expectations to determine and meet satisfactory progress
requirements to receive a grade of Satisfactory.

Students should be following the elements of the Rubric located at
http://researchcenter.waldenu.edu/DBA-Doctoral-Study-Process-and-Documents.htm and
submitting work to Walden Writing Center tutors and Grammarly at Writing Center located at
http://writingcenter.waldenu.edu/

As a benchmark, the Literature Review in section 1 should have a minimum of 60 scholarly,
peer-reviewed, and recent (defined as within 5-years of the expected date of graduation)
references.

The overall number of references throughout the Proposal should be a minimum of 100 with at
least 85% of them being recent, scholarly, and peer-reviewed.

2b - Student should attend Residency 2 during enrollment no later than the 2nd or 3rd session
of DDBA-8100. Exceptions to residency attendance during this time must be approved in
advance by the Program Director at DBAProgramDirector@waldenu.edu

6

JANUARY 2012

Step 3: DDBA-8100 or 9000
(60 credit hours needed to graduate) Proposal Approval Process

3a - Chair - Once the student and Chair feel Sections 1 and 2 of the Proposal meet all
requirements in the most current version of the DBA Rubric located in the Research Center and
has been checked by Grammarly at the Writing Center, the Chair will e-mail the doctoral study
proposal package to the second committee member, with copies to:

freda.turner@waldenu.edu
dbamethodologist@waldenu.edu
student

The package should contain the following:

A clean copy of Sections 1 and 2 (no markups, no revisions, no comments)

Copy of the Turnitin (TII) report

Copy of the Chair completed rubric for sections 1 and 2 (ensure you use the latest
version)

Please follow the file name and e-mail subject line naming convention.

The second committee member has 14-calendar days to review and return the Proposal to the
Chair. Establish the return date in the e-mail to the Second Committee Member and request
acknowledgment. Please note that the day sent for review counts as day 1.

3b - Second Committee Member will acknowledge receipt of documents.

Second Committee Member will review and return the Proposal with any comments, approved or
disapproved recommendation, and a completed Doctoral Study rubric to:

Chair


7

JANUARY 2012

3c - Chair The Chair will work with the student to ensure all rubric requirements have been
met and all recommended edits have been made. The Proposal must be complete, grammatically
correct, and in full APA compliance prior to e-mailing to the URR. This document is the highest
form of scholarship and will not be approved with APA or grammar errors. The Chair will then
ask the student to provide a clean copy of Sections 1 and 2 and the Turnitin Report. The Chair
submits a clean copy of the Proposal to:



3d - DBA Methodologist Validates academic quality standards, including mapping to the
rubric, content alignment, design, methodology, formatting, grammar, and APA are in
compliance and meet the academic standards of the DBA program and Walden University.
The review should be completed within 5 calendar days.

If not approved by the DBA Methodologist, please go to process step 3a.

If approved by the DBA Methodologist, please go to process step 3e.

3e - Chair - after DBA Methodologist approval, Chair e-mails the following documents (a) a
clean copy of the committee-approved proposal (Sections 1 and 2), (b) Turnitin report, (c) DBA
Rubric completed by the Chair and, (d) DBA rubric completed by the Second Committee
Member to the URR member for review, with copies to:

student


The URR has 14-calendar days to review and return the Proposal to the Chair. Establish the
return date in the e-mail to the URR and request acknowledgment. Please note that the day sent
for review counts as day 1.

8

JANUARY 2012

3f - URR (not approved) - If any revisions are requested, by definition, the Proposal is not
approved. The URR will e-mail the Proposal with suggested changes and feedback within the
document and a completed rubric to the Chair with a copy to:



3g - Chair review each comment by the URR and contact the student to share the results and
discuss any strategies for addressing the feedback.

3h - Student - will work with the Chair to address each comment provided in the study.
Student will create and provide a change matrix (see page 21) of this document for a sample
along with the revised Proposal. The change matrix will have three columns: column 1 identifies
the issue noted by the URR, column 2 will identify the change made by the student, and column 3
will identify the page in the doc study where the update is located.

Note: If the student and Chair agree that a URR comment will not be incorporated, that decision
is acceptable; however, a brief academic justification must be provided in the change matrix. It
is acceptable and recommended that the Chair and URR discuss any areas of disagreement and
work to resolve such issues before e-mailing to the student. It is not acceptable to decline to
address a URR comment without justification.

3i - Chair - when the Chair approves the revised Proposal, Chair will e-mail to the Second
Committee Member for review. Please follow the file name and e-mail subject line naming
convention. The Second Committee Member has 14-calendar days to review and return the
Proposal to the Chair. Establish the return date in the e-mail to the URR and request

3j - Second Committee Member

If not approved, the Second Committee Member will return the Proposal with suggested changes
and feedback within the document and a completed rubric to the Chair. Please go to process step
3g.

If approved, the Second Committee Member will e-mail the completed rubric to Chair indicating
approval. Go to process step 3k.

9

JANUARY 2012

3k - Chair when Chair and Second Committee Member both approve, resubmit the Proposal
and electronically signed change matrix to the URR, copying:


Please follow the file name and e-mail subject line naming convention. The URR has 14-
calendar days to review and return the Proposal to the Chair. Establish the return date in the e-
mail to the URR and request acknowledgment. Please note that the day sent for review counts as
day 1.

Each comment from the URR must be addressed on the change matrix. This process continues
until approval is received from the URR. The URR cannot approve the Proposal until all errors
have been corrected as metrics of errors found in advanced review levels are maintained.
Turnaround time for each review is 14 calendar days, so accuracy is critical. The function of the
URR is to provide a fresh set of eyes to review the document prior to upper level of reviews
outside of the College of Management and Technology.

If URR does not approve, go to process step 3h.

If URR approves, go to process step 3l.

3l URR URR will e-mail the following documents (a) a completed URR rubric, (b) approved
Doctoral Study Proposal (clean, no review comments or recommended changes allowed), (c)
comment that the Turnitin report has been reviewed and there are no violations of academic
integrity or material that has not been cited to:

Full committee (student, Chair, Second Committee Member)

3m - Student student will coordinate with Chair and Second Committee member to determine
three different dates/times that the Chair and Second Committee Member can support an oral
defense conference call. Student then provides these dates/times to the Chair.

10

JANUARY 2012

3n - Chair - completes and e-mails the Oral Defense Conference Call Request Form, which can
be found on the Research Center website at http://researchcenter.waldenu.edu/Oral-Defense.htm
at least 7 business days before the defense date to:


3o - DBA Doc Study e-mails confirmation that the oral defense conference call has been
scheduled to:

Chair
Second committee member
Student

3p - Student - 3-days prior to oral defense, prepare no more than 20 slides using section 1 major
headings of the Proposal as the guide for the oral defense PowerPoint presentation.
Graphics/photographs that compliment the message/content of the study should be included in
the PowerPoint to add interest/creativity. Provide Oral Defense PowerPoint slides to:

Chair

3q - Chair reviews Oral Defense PowerPoint slides, works with student on any requested
revisions, and when approved, e-mails the slides to:

Second Committee Member

3r - Student - 1-day prior to oral defense remind the Chair and Second Committee Member.
The URR is not required to attend the oral defense. The oral defense call is recorded and
archived for 30-days.

11

JANUARY 2012

3s - Chair, Second Committee Member, and Student - participates in the oral defense
conference call. Three outcomes are possible (a) pass; (b) pass with modifications to the
Proposal; or (c) student failed.

3t

If pass, go to process step 3u.

If pass with modifications, student will revise proposal in accordance with suggested revisions
from Chair and Second Committee Member. Go to process step 3u.

If fail, student will revise proposal in accordance with suggestions revisions from Chair and
Second Committee Member. Go to process step 3m.

3u - Chair after approval of the oral defense, notify:

Student

Chair submits a clean copy of the approved Sections 1 and 2 of the Proposal, the Proposal
Approval Form, and a copy of the consensus rubric (one rubric with agreed ratings of both Chair
and Second committee member) located at http://researchcenter.waldenu.edu to:


Note a consensus rubric is one rubric with an agreed upon rating from two or more committee
members. Each committee member name must be annotated as completing the review on page 2
of the rubric.
12

JANUARY 2012

4. IRB Approval Process

The IRB application, sample consent form, and sample letters of cooperation documents are
located at http://researchcenter.waldenu.edu/Application-and-General-Materials.htm

4a - Student - Submit completed IRB application and all associated IRB required documents to
the Chair for accuracy and feedback. Ensure the application is spell checked, grammar checked,
and complies with all APA requirements. Errors result in increased turnaround time when
returned by IRB for corrections. If you do not have the NIH certificate from DDBA-8427, you
may retrieve it from the link section located at http://researchcenter.waldenu.edu/Links.htm

4b - Chair - submits IRB application and all supplemental materials to IRB@waldenu.edu .
Allow 4-6 weeks for IRB review; however, it typically takes about 14-days.

4c - Student/Chair - complete any revisions requested by the IRB until approved -- allowing 14-
days for review.

4d - Student/Chair Chair and student receive IRB e-mail notification of approval to start data
collection and move forward with the Doctoral Study. The IRB approval is good for 1 calendar
year from the approval date.

4e - Chair - notifies the following of IRB approval:


13

JANUARY 2012

5. Doctoral Study Approval Process

5a - Student - converts sections 1 and 2 into past tense. Start work on section 3. Collect the
data, perform data analysis, and complete writing of Section 3 of the Doctoral Study. Student
should check document to ensure mapping to the rubric. When complete, student e-mails the
following documents: (a) completed and clean Doctoral Study, (b) Grammarly report, (c)
Turnitin originality report, and (d) completed rubric self-assessment to:

Chair


5b - Chair Once the student and Chair feel Sections 1, 2, and 3 of the Doctoral Study meet all
requirements in the most current version of the DBA Rubric located in the Research Center and
has been checked by Grammarly at the Writing Center, the Chair will e-mail the Doctoral Study
package to the Second Committee Member, with copies to:

student

The package should contain the following:

A clean copy of the Doctoral Study (all three sections) -- (no markups, no revisions, no
comments)

Copy of the Turnitin (TII) report

Copy of the Chair completed rubric for the entire Doctoral Study (ensure you have the
latest version)


The second committee member has 14-calendar days to review and return the Doctoral Study to
the Chair. Establish the return date in the e-mail to the second committee member and request
14

JANUARY 2012

5c - Second Committee Member will acknowledge receipt of documents. Second Committee
Member will review and e-mail the Doctoral Study with any comments, approved or disapproved
recommendation, and a completed Doctoral Study rubric to:

Chair


5d - Chair The Chair will work with the student to ensure all rubric requirements have been
met and all recommended edits have been completed. The Doctoral Study must be complete,
grammatically correct, and in full APA compliance prior to e-mailing to the URR. This
document is the highest form of scholarship and will not be approved with APA or grammar
errors in the document. The Chair will then ask the student to provide a clean copy of the
Doctoral Study and the Turnitin Report. The Chair e-mails a clean copy of the Doctoral Study
to:



5e - DBA Methodologist Validates academic quality standards, including mapping to the
rubric, content alignment, design, methodology, formatting, grammar, and APA are in
compliance and meet the academic standards of the DBA program and Walden University. The
review should be completed within 5 calendar days.

If not approved by the DBA Methodologist, please go to process step 5b.

If approved by the DBA Methodologist, please go to process step 5f.

5f - Chair - after DBA Methodologist approval, Chair e-mails the following documents (a)
clean copy of the committee-approved Doctoral Study, (b) Turnitin report, (c) DBA Rubric
completed by the Chair and, (d) DBA rubric completed by the Second Committee Member to the
URR member for review, with copies to:

student

The URR has 14-calendar days to review and return the Doctoral Study to the Chair. Establish
the return date in the e-mail to the URR and request acknowledgment. Please note that the day
sent for review counts as day 1.

15

JANUARY 2012

5g - URR (not approved) - If any revisions are requested, by definition, the Doctoral Study is
not approved. The URR will return the Doctoral Study with suggested changes and feedback
within the document and a completed rubric to the Chair with a copy to:



5h - Chair - review each comment by the URR and contact the student to share the results and
discuss any strategies for addressing the feedback.

5i - Student - will work with the Chair to address each comment provided in the study.
Student will create and provide a change matrix (see page 21) of this document for a sample)
along with the revised Doctoral Study. The change matrix will have three columns: Column 1
identifies the issue noted by the URR, column 2 will identify the change made by the student,
and column 3 will identify the page in the doc study where the update is located.

Note: If the student and Chair agree that a URR comment will not be incorporated, that decision
is acceptable; however, a brief academic justification must be provided in the change matrix. It
is acceptable and recommended that the Chair and URR discuss any areas of disagreement and
work to resolve such issues before e-mailing to the student. It is not acceptable to decline to
address a URR comment without justification.

5j - Chair - when the Chair approves the revised Doctoral Study, Chair will e-mail to the Second
Committee Member for review. Please follow the file name and e-mail subject line naming
convention. The Second Committee Member has 14-calendar days to review and return the
Doctoral Study to the Chair. Establish the return date in the e-mail to the URR and request

5k - Second Committee Member

If not approved, the Second Committee Member will e-mail the Doctoral Study with suggested
changes and feedback within the document and a completed rubric to the Chair. Please go to
process step 5h.

If approved, the Second Committee Member will e-mail the completed rubric to Chair indicating
approval. Go to process step 5l.
16

JANUARY 2012

5l - Chair when Chair and Second Committee Member both approve, e-mail the Doctoral
Study and electronically signed change matrix to the URR, copying:


Please follow the file name and e-mail subject line naming convention. The URR has 14-
calendar days to review and return the Doctoral Study to the Chair. Establish the return date in
the e-mail to the URR and request acknowledgment. Please note that the day sent for review
counts as day 1.

Each comment from the URR must be addressed on the change matrix. This process continues
until approval is received from the URR. The URR cannot approve the Doctoral Study until all
errors have been corrected as metrics of errors found in advanced review levels are maintained.
Turnaround time for each review is 14 calendar days, so accuracy is critical. The Chair should
be professional in all exchanges with the URR as this is a team project. The function of the URR
is to provide a fresh set of eyes to review the document prior to upper level of reviews outside of
the College of Management and Technology.

If URR does not approve, go to process step 5i.

If URR approves, go to process step 5m.

5m - URR upon URR approval, the URR must submit (a) a statement that the Turnitin (TII)
has been reviewed and no academic integrity issues have been violated, (b) a clean approved
copy of the Doctoral Study, and (c) a URR completed Rubric. The URR provides these three
items to the following requesting a Form and Style review:

student

5n - DBA Doc Study submits the documentation to Form and Style. After Form and Style
review, the edited document is returned to dba.docstudy and the Committee.

5o Chair forwards the Form and Style edited document to:


17

JANUARY 2012

5p - Student - makes all changes required by the Form and Style review and returns (a) the
completed (clean) Doctoral Study, and (b) a completed change matrix form to:

Chair

5q - Chair upon review and approval of student revisions from Form and Style, e-mail a clean
copy of the Doctoral Study to:

programdirector@waldenu.edu
URR

5r - Student student will coordinate with Chair and Second Committee member to determine
three different dates/times that the Chair and Second Committee Member can support an oral
defense conference call. Student then provides these dates/times to the Chair.

5s - Chair - completes and submits the Oral Defense Conference Call Request Form, which can
be found on the Research Center website at least 7 business days before the defense date to:


5t - DBA Doc Study e-mails confirmation that the oral defense conference call has been
scheduled to:

Chair
Student

5u - Student - 3-days prior to oral defense, prepare no more than 25 slides including section 3
that tells the story of the research project including findings and recommendations. Provide Oral
Defense PowerPoint slides to:

Chair

18

JANUARY 2012

5v - Chair reviews Oral Defense PowerPoint slides, works with student on any requested
revisions, and when approved, e-mails the slides to:


5w - Student - 1-day prior to oral defense reminds the Chair and Second Committee Member.
The URR is not required to attend the oral defense. The oral defense call is recorded.

5x - Chair, Second Committee Member, and Student - participate in the oral defense
conference call. Three outcomes are possible (a) pass; (b) pass with modifications to the
Doctoral Study; or (c) student failed.

5y
If pass, Go to process step 5z.

If pass with modifications, student will revise Doctoral Study in accordance with
suggestions revisions from Chair and Second Committee Member. Go to process step 5z.

If fail, student will revise Doctoral Study in accordance with suggestions revisions from
Chair and Second Committee Member. Go to process step 5r.

5z - Chair after approval of the oral defense, notify:

Student
URR

Chair submits a clean copy of the approved doctoral study and a copy of the consensus rubric
(one rubric with agreed ratings of both Chair and Second committee member) located at
http://researchcenter.waldenu.edu to:

URR

Note a consensus rubric is one rubric with an agreed upon rating from two or more committee
members. Each committee member name must be annotated as completing the review on page 2
of the rubric.

19

JANUARY 2012

5aa URR reviews and approves the final Doctoral Study.

If not approved return Doctoral Study to Chair with recommended revisions.

If approved, then go to process step 5ab.

5ab - DBA Doc Study Upon URR approval, e-mails the final Doctoral Study for Abstract
review by the Chief Academic Officer (CAO) to dba.docstudy@waldenu.edu . All abstract
information, forms, examples, and tutorials may be found at
http://researchcenter.waldenu.edu/Abstract-Assistance-for-all-programs-with-research-
capstones.htm

20

JANUARY 2012

6. Final Steps Prior to Graduation
6a - URR/Chair/Student - If revisions are requested by the Chief Academic Officer relating to
the abstract, work together to address each revision.

6b - URR e-mails the abstract to


Continue above process until abstract is approved by the Chief Academic Officer.

6c - DBA Doc Study - after abstract is approved by the CAO, notify:

Entire committee (Chair, second committee member, student, and URR)
somdocadvising@waldenu.edu

6d - DBA Doc Study provide student with instructions to complete submission documents to
UMI/ProQuest CSA.

The student is reminded that all required sessions of DDBA-9000 must be completed with a
passing grade before the degree is conferred. To receive a passing grade, the student must
continue to meet all syllabus requirements. Students completing their study prior to the
completion of the 5 required DBA 9000 sessions may do one of the following:

Tutor other students in DDBA-9000 (many graduates go into teaching).
Co-publish with the Chair/Second Committee Member/URR with material from the
completed Doctoral Study into a scholarly journal or professional publication.
Complete another specialization course.
Celebrate, but continue to meet all DDBA-9000 course requirements.

The student will receive confirmation that the UMI/ProQuest CSA submission has been accepted
and approved for publishing.

6e Student - Complete and return Survey of Earned Doctorates.

6f Student - Receive confirmation from graduation@waldenu.edu that your degree audit has
been completed. This final step is critical.

6g Student - Review www.mywaldenalumni.com/commencement for information on
attending commencement.

21

JANUARY 2012

SAMPLE CHANGE MATRIX FORM

Submissions will not be accepted without a completed and signed change matrix
Note, the entries below are sample entries to show elements of a good change matrix entry

Title of Dissertation: (Insert study title here)
Learner: Student Name Here
Date: April 30, 2011

Chair Confirmation of Review Items Addressed

By providing an electronic signature (typed name), within the space below, the Chair is attesting that
the submission meets all Walden University Proposal/Doctoral Study requirements and the
previously noted issues have been satisfactorily addressed and are ready for review.

I have verified that the Students original/revised submission meets all review criteria (and for
revised editions) has adequately addressed the previous reviews feedback.

Chair: (insert name here) Date:

Please note that papers submitted without the Chairs confirmation will be returned without
further review.

Reviewers comment
number and
recommendation
How addressed Page
numbers
where
change
appears

A1 Remove
anthropomorphism (see
APA page 69).

Action Taken and Why: Agreed - anthropomorphism
should be removed.

Original The study discussed the role of the politics
in the jungle.

Revised Johnson (2009) discussed the role of politics
in the jungle.

8
22

JANUARY 2012

A22 See APA Section
6.30, 1st bullet for
information on how to
format the volume number
properly.

Action Taken and Why Agreed the volume
number should be italicized.

Original - Sullivan, S.E., & Mainiero, L.A. (2007).
Kaleidoscope careers: Benchmarking ideas for
fostering family-friendly workplaces.
Organizational Dynamics, 36(1), 45-62.
Revised - Sullivan, S.E., & Mainiero, L.A. (2007).
Kaleidoscope careers: Benchmarking ideas for
fostering family-friendly workplaces.
Organizational Dynamics, 36(1), 45-62.

76

Doctoral Study Process Checklist: Student Chair Second Committee Member URR

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Doctoral Study Process Checklist: Student Chair Second Committee Member URR

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

1

Você também pode gostar