Doctor of Business Administration (Higher Education ... › ichem › pdf › DBA_GUIDELINESCohort3.pdf · Student Handbook DBA (HEM) 5 5.1.1 Assessment of Unit 1 : Strategic Organisational

Doctor of Business Administration (Higher Education Management)

Phase 1 and Phase 2 Guidelines

DBA3 ( Registering 2004)

Student Handbook DBA (HEM)

1

1. GENERAL REGULATIONS, REGISTRATION AND FURTHER PROCEDURES 1.1 REGULATIONS The University Regulations outline all the formal procedures to be followed. Regulation 16 relates particularly to postgraduate degrees. The document is found on the website at: http://www.bath.ac.uk/regulations/ The following forms are also completed when necessary: • Suspension or extension of study • Change of, or additional, supervisor • Withdrawal from registration • Notice of intention to submit thesis (at least two months in advance of doing so) • Change of Circumstance, i.e. of address or name • Request for help with expenses for conference attendance • Fieldwork notification form Copies of all these forms may be obtained from the DBA(HEM) Administrator. 2. CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES/REGISTRATION STATUS Personal Circumstances It is important that the Student Records database is kept up-to-date for all students. If you change your name or address during your studies you must complete form CC1 (Notification of Change of Student’s Personal Circumstances). If you are changing your name, please provide proof of change, e.g. marriage certificate. 2.1 Academic Circumstances Should you wish to make any of the following changes to your academic circumstances, you should discuss the matter with the Director of Studies for DBA(HEM) so that the appropriate form can be completed and approved: • A suspension of registration • An extension of registration • A change of programme • Discontinuation of registration

If you are considering withdrawing from your degree programme you should speak with the the Director of Studies who will be able to give you advice and support. You should also consult with the Student Finance Office who will be able to advise you on the fee implications. All forms are available from the DBA(HEM)Administrator and should be submitted to the Research Administrator for approval and processing after completion.

http://www.bath.ac.uk/regulations/


2

3 THE DBA(HEM) PROGRAMME 3.1 PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES The DBA (HEM) is a part-time research degree at the doctoral level completed in around 4 years. The minimum time for completion of the degree is 3 years and the maximum time allowed is eight years. It aims to: • Prepare/assist participants to exercise professional responsibility and leadership roles in areas of

strategic planning, decision-making and organisational change. • Provide opportunities for participants to test theories of strategic and organisational

development in their own settings, and thereby advance knowledge in these areas. • Develop those research skills appropriate for senior levels of institutional management, so that

roles are exercised in full knowledge of the ethical, political and theoretical issues involved. • Equip participants with the ability to use research for policy improvement, the sharing of ideas

and good practice (especially in different cultural settings) and the generation of explanatory tools grounded in theories relevant to good contemporary institutional practice.

3.2 THE DISTINCTIVE NATURE OF THE DBA (HEM) The DBA (HEM) is part of the generic group known as professional doctorates. It differs in philosophy and structure from the traditional research doctorate in that: • It gives particular priority to the development of candidates as managers, the so-called

‘reflective professional’. • It places a high priority on the beneficial transfer of research and learning to the workplace,

whether higher education institution or higher education agency. • It is interventionist in its relationship to the topics being investigated, and adopts an applied,

problem-based focus to research. • It requires participants to become involved with implementing and evaluating change at

strategic level in their organisations as part of their study. • It regularly brings the cohort of participants together in residential periods or via electronic

media to share experience, views and good practice and to generate mutual peer support. • It seeks to provide an international experience for candidates in terms of both student mix and a

structured comparative study of higher education management. It is more structured, combining research-based assignments and a major research project, within a more prescribed time-scale, helping participants to combine study with their work and encouraging a high competition rate. However, it is important to stress the programme is at doctoral level in terms of: • The expectation of original enquiry and contribution to knowledge, rigour, validity and

conceptual underpinnings. • The admission criteria for the programme which are comparable to those for a PhD. • Moderation by external examiners against universally accepted criteria. 3.3 EXPERIENCE AND DIVERSITY OF PARTICIPANTS The client base for the DBA (HEM) is international. This is consistent with market need, ICHEM’s ethos and pedigree, and the vast international experience of the ICHEM faculty members. The international orientation thus has the benefit of enabling colleagues from different institutional and

Formatted: Bulleted + Level:1 + Aligned at: 0 pt + Tabafter: 18 pt + Indent at: 18pt, Tabs: Not at 18 pt



3

national settings to learn from each other’s knowledge, insights and experience of strategic university management. They are expected to be at the level of deans, vice presidents, heads of administration, heads of department, directors of large centres, university businesses and large bureaux, together with senior leaders from governmental ministries and agencies. 3.4 A PARTICIPATIVE PROGRAMME Study and learning on the DBA (HEM) are interactive processes which value the participation of each student and the different perspective each brings to the discussion. This learning style is only made possible if, as at Bath, consistently high entry standards are maintained in terms of both academic and professional achievements. In this way, in addition to learning from faculty members who are leading experts in their fields, participants gain from invaluable cross-fertilisation of ideas and viewpoints amongst a diverse and international group. Our selection process is designed to identify those for whom the DBA (HEM) represents more than just a ‘means to an end’, and who are able and willing to contribute their views and ideas to enrich the learning experience for all concerned. 3.5 THE RIGHT SIZE AND FOCUS Despite the impressive growth which the School of Management has experienced in recent years, we have studiously avoided the ‘production line’ approach. We believe we have succeeded in maintaining a people-centred ambience and a service culture which treats you like an individual, not simply ‘another student.’ Students frequently comment on the high degree of personal attention and support they receive from academic and administrative staff. The DBA (HEM) normally admits no more than 20 participants per annum. This enables us to combine the advantages of a personalised learning environment where participants can get to know each other, with the critical mass that is necessary to offer the expected resources and breadth of experience amongst the student body. 4 PROGRAMME STRUCTURE 4.1 OUTLINE OF STRUCTURE The DBA (HEM) has an annual intake every May. It is structured in two phases: Phase 1: Unit 1: Strategic Organisational Change in Higher Education Unit 2: Strategic Issues in Higher Education Development and Management (Part 1 and Part 2) Unit 3: Research Methods Phase 2: Thesis 4.2 PROGRAMME DELIVERY


4

The DBA(HEM) is delivered in residential blocks at the University of Bath with email and telephone contact in between residential periods. During Phase 2, participants work primarily with their supervisor/s and will together negotiate modes and frequency of contact and deadlines. 5 BREAKDOWN OF PHASE 1 5.1 UNIT 1: STRATEGIC ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE IN HIGHER EDUCATION This unit aims to enable participants to: • understand, evaluate and contribute to the key ideas and literature in the field of organizational

change in higher education; • make appropriate judgements regarding which practical approaches and theoretical resources

are relevant to their own contexts; • adopt a reflective practitioner approach to their professional activities; • comprehend, conceive, plan, conduct and justify particular change initiatives in their own areas

of responsibility; • contribute collaboratively to educational change management projects and programmes, both by

providing appropriate expertise themselves, and responding appropriately to the expertise of others.

This unit includes the following themes. Some of these will be individual sessions while others are likely to be themes combined in one session or appearing across more than one session.

Overview of organisational conditions in higher education pertinent to change processes.

• academic and institutional freedom • capacity for change in relation to control instruments • forces of accountability and evaluation, and instruments (quality, finance, personnel, contracts) • partnership or control. Strategic planning in the context of organisational change • external imperatives: comparison of various governmental positions • conceptual basis of strategic management and planning • alternative models and related techniques • contingency factors in selection of models.

Developing change strategies • Typologies of change strategies • Change agents • Analysing leadership typologies in change. Evaluating change • Evaluation in the planning and management of change • Strategies for evaluation of change • Change methodologies.

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0pt, Hanging: 17.85 pt,Bulleted + Level: 1 + Alignedat: 0 pt + Tab after: 18 pt +Indent at: 18 pt


5

5.1.1 Assessment of Unit 1 : Strategic Organisational Change in Higher Education Assessment will be on the basis of one written assignment of around 8000 words. In order to achieve a Pass in each individual assignment, participants are expected to meet the following criteria:

• Explicit statement of the nature of the issue under investigation and setting. • Detailed and critical review of appropriate literatures. • The selection and use of appropriate concepts, models, theories and/or frameworks • Full explanation of the research approach adopted. If applicable, explanation of data collection

methods employed, and means by which the data were analyzed, in the context of an appropriate degree of reflexivity.

• A critical appraisal of the empirical issues under consideration. • Analysis in relation to theory, methods, findings which displays clarity of argument, originality

of thought and approach, and appropriate reflexivity. • The ability to set out clear and thought-provoking conclusions and proposals for further action

in relation to institutional and professional practice. • Clearly structured, well presented, and coherently written in scholarly English. 5.1.2 Possible Assignments Below are suggested titles. You may also modify titles to fit more closely with your own experiences and interests. You may also wish to write to a different title as long as it fits in with the unit content. Please negotiate amended or new titles with the unit co-ordinator. • Select and describe a major policy change which your university has gone through in the last

three years. Using relevant literature as a framework of analysis, outline the story of its development, commenting on the typology of change strategies employed and the associated tactics; the phases through which the policy formation processes passed; and the principal actors and political influences involved. With the benefit of hindsight, and using conceptual frameworks, how might the process have been improved?

• How has the mission and positioning of your university changed in the last five years? What factors have caused the change? Analyse, with reference to the literature, what this has meant in practice and assess the future significance of these and other changes affecting higher education.

• Analyse the changes which have taken place in strategic planning within your institution over the last three years. What were the driving forces behind these changes? What were the major conceptual shifts in planning underpinning these changes? With reference to the literature and good practice in strategic planning, how might things have been done to better advantage?

5.1.3 Indicative Reading Balderston, F E (2nd ed, 1995) Managing Today’s University: strategies for viability, change and excellence Jossey-Bass: San Francisco Baugh, C, Bocock, H, Scott, P and Suli, A (2000) University Leadership: the role of the chief executive SRHE- Open University Press: Milton Keynes Committee of University Chairmen (2000)Progress Report of the Working Party on the Effectiveness of University of Governing Bodies CUC: UK


6

Committee of University Chairmen (2001)Guide for Members of Governing Bodies of Universities and Colleges in England, Wales and Northern Ireland HEFCE: Bristol Duderstadt, J (2000) A University for the 21st Century University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor Duke, C (2002) Managing the Learning University SRHE-Open University Press: Milton Keynes Green, M F (1997)Transforming Higher Education: views from leaders around the world Oryx Press: Phoenix HEFCE (2001)HEFCE Strategic Plan 2001 - 06 HEFCE: Bristol Ncayiyana, D J and Hayward, F M (1999)Effective Governance: a guide for council members of universities and technikons Centre for Higher Education Transformation: South Africa Patterson, G (1997)The University from Ancient Greece to the 20th Century Dunmore Press: New Zealand Shattock, M (2003) Managing Successful Universities SRHE-Open University Press: Milton Keynes Trowler, P L (Ed) (2001) Higher Education Policy and Institutional Change SRHE-Open University Press: Milton Keynes Watson, D (2000) Managing Strategy Open University Press: Milton Keynes See also : Various articles in Institutional Management (IMHE) Various ENQA publications 5.2 UNIT 2: STRATEGIC ISSUES IN HIGHER EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT This unit aims to enable participants to: • Demonstrate an advanced understanding of the nature and dynamics of a series of macro policy

developments in areas affecting the evolution of higher education. • Identify the precise ramifications of the challenges for higher education organisations in

general. • Undertake a critical analysis of the literature and knowledge base for those selected areas. • Identify gaps in the knowledge base and make a contribution to selected areas. • Demonstrate a detailed understanding of the significance of the above for particular contexts. This unit is a double unit and includes the following themes. Some of these will be individual sessions while others are likely to be themes combined in one session or appearing across more than one session. Higher Education and Globalisation • Definitions of Globalisation • Forces behind its development


7

• Higher Education and the Knowledge Economy • New providers and partnerships • Changing Conceptions of access • Higher Education and the Labour Market in the new economy • Implications for government and strategic issues for institutions Internationalism and Borderless Higher Education • Changing conceptions of Internationalism • Internationalisation and massification: the case of China • Institutional alliances and partnerships • The growth and development of borderless higher education • The impact of borderless higher education on core higher education activities • The Limits of Internationalism and borderless Higher Education • Institutional and Government responses Contemporary Approaches to Funding and Managing universities • The implementation of market forces and implications for academic practices • The Role of Government in Funding Higher Education • Emerging Trends in Quality Assurance • The Impact of Leadership on Governance • Marketing Higher Education • Human Resource Strategies • The Emergence of Professional Managers in HE Evolution of teaching and learning • Massification and strategic options • Lifelong learning • Impact of the information society • Quality and calibration of learning structures • Vocationalism and skills development • Postgraduate study • Access; accreditation of prior learning; accreditation of prior experience and learning • Institutional ramifications of lifelong learning Evolution of research and knowledge advancement • Modes 1 and 2 and their implications for institutional positioning, scope and focus • Regional Co-operation • Selectivity and competition; issues for higher education institutions • Co-operation with the private sector; innovation drain and innovation chain • Postgraduate studies • Teaching – research nexus • Quality issues • Funding of research


8

Funding of higher education

• Teaching and research • Financial models – national • Financial models – institutional • Fees and loans • Student support Entrepreneurialism and post-entrepreneurialism in higher education • Forces behind its development • Definitions and conceptual models • Domains of entrepreneurialism • Positioning and mission • Organisational transformation • Intellectual property issues for the future • Institutional advancement 5.2.1 Assessment of Unit 2: Strategic Issues in Higher Education Development and Management Assessment for both Part 1 and Part 2 of Unit 2 will be on the basis of two written assignments of around 8000 words. In order to achieve a Pass in each individual assignment, participants are expected to meet the following criteria:

• Explicit statement of the nature of the issue under investigation and institutional or other setting.

• Detailed and critical review of appropriate literatures.

• The selection and use of appropriate concepts, models, theories and/or frameworks.

• Full explanation of the research approach adopted. If applicable, explanation of data collection methods employed, and means by which the data were analyzed, in the context of an appropriate degree of reflexivity.

• A critical appraisal of the empirical issues under consideration.

• Analysis in relation to theory, methods, findings which displays clarity of argument, originality of thought and approach, and appropriate reflexivity.

• The ability to set out clear and thought-provoking conclusions and proposals for further action in relation to institutional and professional practice.

• Clearly structured, well presented, and coherently written in scholarly English.

5.2.2 Possible Assignments Below are suggested titles. You may also modify titles to fit more closely with your own experiences and interests. You may also wish to write to a different title as long as it fits in with the unit content. Please negotiate amended or new titles with the unit co-ordinator. • Analyse the conceptual differences between globalisation and internationalisation, and devise

performance indicators for each. Apply to the current situation in your own university and devise policy development proposals.

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0pt, Bulleted + Level: 1 +Aligned at: 18 pt + Tab after: 36 pt + Indent at: 36 pt,Tabs: 18 pt, List tab + Not at 36 pt


Formatted: Indent: Left: 0pt, Bulleted + Level: 1 +Aligned at: 18 pt + Tab after: 36 pt + Indent at: 36 pt,Tabs: Not at 36 pt


9

• Develop a policy analysis framework for internationalisation. Apply it to your own university critically.

• How has borderless higher education affected the work of your university in terms of business in your own country, and your own international profile?

• Select a major policy domain in the field of borderless higher education (eg institutional management; human resources; teaching, learning; courses; finance; quality) and indicate how your own university is responding.

• Discuss the proposition that 'internationalisation' of higher education is in reality an opportunity for the expansion of 'Western' dominance in educational markets, management and curricula. Discuss and evaluate possible strategies that ‘non-western’ countries can develop to resist such tendencies.

• Analyse your university’s institutional alliances and partnerships using criteria devised from the literature.

• The interface between professional Administrator and managers, and their academic colleagues, has been described as 'a delicate social contract'. Do you agree? Comment on the implications for management in your own institution.

• A system of quality assurance in higher education is unlikely to satisfy both the demands of accountability and improvement. Discuss. Devise changes that could be implemented to a particular higher education system which could contribute to both accountability and improvement.

• Assess the differences between input and output models of resource allocation at both system and institutional levels and comment on the implications for resource allocation in your own institution.

• Analyse the use of incentives in resource allocation as a tool in policy implementation, using examples drawn from your own and from other institutions.

• Analyse the differences between centralised and devolved systems of resource allocation and comment on the implications for management within your own institution.

• Select any specific entrepreneurial domain of your university eg technology transfer, continuing education, offshore business, international students, facilities’ use. Analyse conceptually the issues involved in responding to the particular challenges. Devise performance indicators from the literature and apply them to your institutions critically. What policy directions for future development follow.

• Using conceptual models for regional development, analyse the role of your institution in its region. Is this changing and, if so, how and why?

• Analyse the interaction between the regional activities of your institution and other areas of activity. How does this impact upon management and on teaching and research?

5.2.3 Suggested Reading More detailed reading lists for each topic as well as set readings will be made available by unit tutors.

Balderston, F E (1995)Managing Today’s University: strategies for viability, change and excellence. Jossey –Bass: San Francisco Barnett,R (1990)The Idea of Higher Education Buckingham: Open University Press Bok, D (2003)Universities in the marketplace, Princeton, New Jersey Bourdieu, P. (1996). The State Nobility. Cambridge: Polity Press.


10

Brown, P., Green, A., and Lauder, H. (2001)Globalisation, Competitiveness, and Skill Formation. Oxford: Oxford University Press Salmi, J. and Verspoor, A.V. (Eds) (1994) Revitalising Higher Education. New York: Pergamon, IAU Press

Castells M (1996) The Rise of the Network Society. The information Age: Economy,Society and Culture. Oxford, Blackwell

CIPFA (1997)Resource Allocation Models in Further and Higher Education, CIPFA: London

Clark, BR (1998)The Entrepreneurial University Pergamon: Oxford CVCP. (2000) The Business of Borderless Higher Education: United Kingdom Perspectives. London: Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals

Davies, JL (1998)The Dialogue of Universities with their Regional Stakeholders, CRE – EC

Duderstadt, J (2000)A University for the 21st Century, University of Michigan Press

Jarvis, P (2001)Universities and Corporate Universities Kogan Page, London

Marginson, S and Considine, M (2000)The Enterprise University Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Middlehurst R, Davies JL et al (2000)The Business of Borderless Education UUK, London

Muller, J. Cloete, N. and Badat, S (eds) Challenges of Globalisation: South African Debates with Manuel Castells Cape Town: Maskew Miller/ Longman

Peterson, M W, Dill, D D, Mets, L et al (1997)Planning and Management for a Changing Environment Jossey-Buss, San Francisco

Scott, P (1998)The Globalisation of Higher Education SRHE – Open University Press, Milton Keynes

Scott, P (ed) (2000)Higher Education Re-formed Falmer Press: London

Slaughter, S and Leslie, L L (1997)Academic Capitalism Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

Thomas, H (2001)Managing Financial Resources Open University Press: Milton Keynes


11

Warner, D and Palfreyman, D (2001)The State of UK Higher Education: Managing Change and Diversity SRHE – Open University Press, Milton Keynes

Williams, G (ed) (2002)The Enterprising University Open University Press: Milton Keynes.

Wit, H de (1999)Quality and Internationalisation in Higher Education, OECD: Paris

Wit, H de (2002)Internationalisation of Higher Education in the United States of America and Europe Greenwood: New York 5.3 UNIT 3: RESEARCH METHODS This unit will enable participants to: • Demonstrate an understanding of different approaches to research on higher education systems

and in higher education institutions. • Develop informed judgments about their strengths and weaknesses and the purposes to which

they are most suited. • Work from different perspectives on the research process--as critical readers and commissioners

of research as well as potential researchers. • Develop a research outline, design, methodology and methods. The unit includes the following themes. Sessions will take the form of an introductory lecture and discussion of the set reading, followed, where appropriate, by practical exercises in research design and collective appraisal.

The Relationship between Theory, Research, Methodology and Methods • The purpose and processes of research in their wider academic contexts. • The logic of research. • The possibilities and limits of research. • How theoretical or practical questions can be made into researchable questions.

Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Educational Research • The different methodological bases and assumptions of quantitative and qualitative

methodologies. • The strengths and weaknesses of the two approaches outlined above and judgments about their

relative appropriateness and feasibility. • Designing and critiquing pieces of quantitative and qualitative research. ‘Applied’ educational research methods • Applied research methods with particular relevance in participants’ situations. • Attractions and dangers of these methods





12

• Consideration of the relationship between research methods and the development of ‘learning organisations’.

Contexts and Conditions of useful research in higher education institutions • The theoretical, practical and ethical issues around research in their own institutions • Strategies for the efficient and effective reading, commissioning and conduct of research. 5.3.1 Assessment of Unit 3: Research Methods Assessment will be on the basis of a written assignment of around 8000 words. In order to achieve a Pass in each individual assignment, participants are expected to meet the following criteria:

1. Clarity of understanding of relationships between theoretical framework, topic of study and research methodology.

2. Analysis and appreciation of main approaches to educational research. 3. Development of Research design and how it relates to the issues under point 1. 4. Effectiveness of justification of selection of research methods. 5. Effectiveness of elaboration of and critical reflection on details of chosen methods. 6. Clarity of awareness of wider implications of research such as ethical considerations. 7. Clearly structured, well presented, and coherently written in scholarly English. 5.3.2 Assignment topics These will be negotiated with the Co-ordinator of the Research Methods unit. This assignment can provide the basis of a platform for the development of the research design and methodology chapter of the thesis. 5.3.3 Indicative reading Burgess, R (1983) In the Field: An Introduction to Field Research London, Unwin. Crossley, M and Vulliamy, G. (1997)(Eds) Qualitative Educational Research in Developing Countries: Current Perspectives Garland 1997) Denzin, N & Lincoln, Y (1994) Handbook of Qualitative Research London, Sage. Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. & Lowe, A. (1991) Management research: An introduction. London: Sage Publications. Eisner, E (1997) The Promise and Perils of Alternative Forms of Data Representation, Educational Researcher 26(6) 4-10. Fay, B (1996) Contemporary Philosophy of Social Science: A Multicultural Approach Oxford, Blackwell. Hammersley, M & Atkinson, P (1993) Ethnography London, Routledge.



13

Hinton, PR (1995) Statistics Explained: a guide for social science students, London, Routledge. McNiff, J, Lomax, P & Whitehead, J (1996) You and Your Action Research Project, London, Routledge. Oppenheim, AN (1994) Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement, London, Pinter, new edition. Pugh, D. 1997. Organisation Theory, Fourth edition, Selected Readings. Penguin. Robinson, V (1993) Problem-Based Methodology: Research for the Improvement of Practice Oxford, Pergamon Press. Schratz, M (1993) Qualitative Voices in Educational Research, London & Washington, Falmer. Wilson, V (1997) Focus Groups: A useful qualitative method for educational research, British Educational Research Journal, 23(2) 209-224. 5.4 PROCESS OF SUBMITTING ASSIGNMENTS Each unit will normally be assessed through an assignment of 8 000 words, although this may be configured differently for some units. You will negotiate the details of each with the Co-ordinating tutor of the relevant unit. A sample of marked assignments will be subject to scrutiny by an external examiner. Grades are confirmed at the DBA(HEM) Examination Board meetings and through the relevant School and University committees. 5.4.1 Submission of Assignments Please follow these procedures when submitting an assignment. The first item to be submitted should be an OUTLINE of your assignment. Please email the outline to the DBA(HEM) Administrator for recording as well as to the Unit Co-ordinator. Once you have received feedback on the assignment and complete a draft , please label the first submission of the assignment DRAFT. The DRAFT submission may be made by email to the DBA administrator and the unit co-ordinator. The FINAL version must be sent as a PAPER COPY to the DBA administrator in order to be accepted. The PAPER COPY must be accompanied by a COVER SHEET obtained from the DBA(HEM) administrator and the DECLARATION about Cheating and Plagiarism must be signed and dated. Your final assignment should normally be presented using the conventions required by many journals. They should be typed on one side of the paper, double-spacing with ample margins. All pages should be numbered.


14

5.4.2 Quoting and Listing References Literature references should always be clear and accurate. This implies that you should include sufficient detail to enable the reference to be identified without recourse to further searching; author and title alone are not sufficient. There is more than one acceptable system of referencing, but the University of Bath has adopted the Harvard system as its preferred house style. Further information on referencing work and plagiarism can be found on: www.bath.ac.uk/keyskills (to be found under the sections on writing and IT skills). Guidance is also available in the Library publication: ‘A Guide to Citing References’, given at: http://www.bath.ac.uk/library/guides/references.html Consistency is all important. If you are preparing a paper for a particular journal however, you must follow the style used by that journal. In addition to the use of quotation marks when quoting from original sources and secondary material, full reference for both quotes and paraphrases or summaries of published material must be given. All references should then be included in a bibliography at the end of the piece of work. Appropriate references for web-based material must also be given, including the relevant URL. The leaflet entitled ‘A Guide to Citing References’ which is available from the Library includes advice for citing web-based material. 5.4.3 Cheating and Plagiarism There are various forms of academic dishonesty but in the student's context it means cheating in examinations or presenting work for assessment which is not your own. Plagiarism as a form of cheating takes place when the student 'borrows' or copies information, data or results from an unacknowledged source, without quotation marks or any indication that the presenter is not the original author or researcher. If carried out knowingly, cheating and plagiarism have the objective of deceiving examiners and this threatens the integrity of the assessment procedures and the value of your award. Work produced by someone else may be summarised or repeated, providing it is referenced to the original author. As well as text, work such as diagrams, maps and charts must also be acknowledged. Any student found to have used unfair means in any examination or assessment procedure will be penalised. ‘Unfair means’ include: • cheating, for example unauthorised reference to notes or course material in an examination. • fabrication, e.g. reporting on experiments never performed. • falsification, e.g. misrepresentation of the results of experimentation. • plagiarism, i.e. taking the writings or ideas of another and representing them as one's own. • unfair collaboration or collusion; i.e. the representation of work produced in collaboration with

another person or persons as the work of a single candidate. The School will determine the nature and severity of the penalty but this may mean failure of the unit concerned or a part of the degree, with no provision for reassessment or retrieval of that failure. Proven cases of plagiarism or cheating can also lead to an Inquiry Hearing and/or disciplinary proceedings as indicated in University Regulation 7.4(h).


http://www.bath.ac.uk/keyskills

http://www.bath.ac.uk/library/guides/references.html


15

You will be required to sign a declaration to accompany the assignments and the thesis certifying that you are aware of the University regulation on plagiarism and of guidelines on plagiarism issued at Faculty or programme level, and that the work submitted is your own except where indicated with appropriate references.

The declaration takes the following form: “I certify that I have read and understood the entry in the School of Management DBA(HEM) Handbook on Cheating and Plagiarism and that all material in this assignment is my own work, except where I have indicated with appropriate references.” 5.4.4 Late Submission of Assignments All coursework for assessment will have a specified date for submission. Should you anticipate any difficulty in meeting this deadline you may approach the Director of Studies to discuss an extension. The Director of Studies may grant an extension to a submission date should there be valid mitigating circumstances affecting your ability to meet the deadline. 5.4.5 Procedures for the Review of a Board of Studies Decision (Appeals) University Regulation 17 (Conduct of Academic Reviews) explains in which circumstances a student may request that the Board of Studies reconsider a decision relating to a failed unit or part of degree or the failure to be able to progress to the next part of a degree. In summary, the following are the grounds under which such a review may be permitted: • that there exist circumstances affecting the performance of the candidate of which the Board of

Examiners have not been made aware and which you could not reasonably have been expected to have disclosed to the Director of Studies in accordance with the Regulation on mitigating circumstances (15.3 d);

• that there were procedural irregularities in the conduct of the examinations or formal course assessments (including administrative error) of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt whether the Board of Examiners would have reached their decision had the irregularities not occurred;

• that there is positive evidence of prejudice, bias or inadequate assessment on the part of one or more of the examiners.

Any student seeking a review on any of the grounds indicated above must notify the Chair of the Faculty Board of Studies in writing within fourteen days of being notified of the decision of the Board. It is also advisable to discuss the matter with your Director of Studies or the Students’ Union (Vice President for Academic Affairs, email: [email protected]) as soon as possible. Where the Chair of the Board of Studies, in consultation with the Head of School, agrees that there is a prima facie case for an academic review, the Chair may consult with the Director of Studies and internal examiners to determine whether or not the student’s desired outcome is the most appropriate action. Where this is the case, the Chair may take executive action to approve the outcome without the need for a review hearing. Where the Chair, in consultation with the Head of School, agrees that there is a prima facie case for a review but executive action is deemed inappropriate, the Board of Studies will conduct a review hearing. The student will be permitted to appear in person before the Sub-Committee, accompanied by a friend or advisor. It should be noted that executive action cannot be invoked in cases where the review relates to the conferment of an award.



16

6. PHASE 2 THE THESIS Candidates move on to Phase 2 once they have completed and passed all 4 assignments in Phase 1. Each candidate upon entering Phase 2 will have a supervisor or supervisors. There is no transfer report or transfer process as the completion of the assignments to doctoral level is deemed to be sufficient to move on to the thesis. Candidates will be expected to clarify the topic for their thesis during Phase 1. At initial registration, they will be expected to have defined broad area(s) for consideration. While a supervisor will only be formally appointed once candidates have moved into Phase 2, it is advisable to start thinking about potential supervisors and beginning discussions as soon as possible. In determining the nature and scope of the topic, candidates and supervisors will consider amongst other factors the relevance of the proposed work to current and emerging organisational strategies and issues, the extent to which it would be substantial enough to justify doctoral level research, the credibility of the research design and the ways in which the study would build upon existing research. Given that the DBA is a professional practice doctoral qualification, it is essential this is reflected in the character of the thesis. Candidates should be encouraged to be reflective practitioners but to conduct such reflective practice within an analytically rigorous, conceptually informed and evidence based way. The thesis may also entail intervening in some system or other to deliver change around the practice theme of the thesis. 6.1 Doctoral theses may be characterised as follows: Option 1. The theoretical model This should be positively discouraged. This would be a thesis written entirely from a literature or theoretical point of view , that is, with no original empirical material, with no practice based interpretation of the relevant literature, and with no intervention. Option 2 : The theory/practice interpretative model This is a model which rests strongly on sound synthesis and critical reflection of relevant literature but with the attempt to apply the theoretical and practical messages of that literature to some defined problem area in the theme under review. Option 3: The Empirical Model Candidates would do the literature part of model 2 but would also involve some original empirical inquiry and some attempt to link the resultant findings to a practice related issue. Option 4: The Interventionist Model This is the action research or interventionist model. Literature would be reviewed, practice assessed, an intervention would be designed and executed and lessons reported on. Option 1 is not regarded as fit for the purposes of the DBA-HEM. Options 2, 3 and 4 and variants thereof are required as suitable.


17

6.2 The thesis will consist of one of the following :

A) a thesis of c. 40,000 words minimum and a maximum of 45 000 words. It is also expected that candidates will produce two annexes to their thesis, namely:

a)a piece entitled ‘Reflections on my Intellectual and Professional Journey’ – a critical account of their personal development (maximum 3,000 words) over the programme

b) an Executive report for their organisation with the status of a briefing paper for management on precise conclusions and recommendations arising from the study (maximum 5,000 words).

B) A thesis of 50 000 words minimum and a maximum of 55 000 words. An account of the

personal development of the candidate as well as conclusions and recommendations arising from the study should be integrated into the body of the thesis.

C) A thesis of c. 25,000 words minimum and another research based enquiry

of c. 15,000 words minimum. The latter may comprise articles accepted in appropriate refereed journals with appropriate reputation, which equates with the intellectual benchmark acceptable for doctoral students. Candidates will produce two annexes to their thesis, namely

• a piece entitled ‘Reflections on my Intellectual and Professional Journey’ – a critical

account of their personal development (maximum 3,000 words) over the programme • an Executive report for their organisation with the status of a briefing paper for

management on precise conclusions and recommendations arising from the study (maximum 5,000 words).

In all options, the thesis should make an original contribution to knowledge in the research domain and a contribution to professional practice. The thesis should contain material of publishable quality.

Students who feel they have a case to exceed these limits should first gain permission from the Director of Studies. These word limits do not include appendices.

6.3 CANDIDATURE FORM In order to register for the thesis you should complete a Candidature Form which must include a research proposal and thesis title. This must pass through the relevant School of Management committees and the Board of Studies for approval. You may obtain this form from the DBA Administrator. Any subsequent change to details shown on the ‘Candidature Form’ must be approved by the Board of Studies.


18

6.4 PREPARING THE RESEARCH PROPOSAL You should consult with your supervisor to produce a 200 word abstract outlining your research proposal. You should aim to include the following: Title: Background: A concise background to previous relevant work is required. Purpose: This gives the aims and purpose of the intended research, with a full explanation and

exploration of your research question. Scope: Sample size, location of research, which country. Method: Procedures, techniques and research tools that you think you will need to use. 6.5 SUPERVISION Introduction You should plan to be in contact with your supervisor/s regularly. Remember that other members of your School and the university are also a valuable resource that is available to you. Effective supervision involves mutual obligation: on students to seek supervision, and on academic staff to provide it. If you are not receiving the advice and other support that you need, please discuss this with the Director of Studies sooner rather than later. You and your supervisor will be required to complete Annual Progress Reports. The Annual Progress Reports are intended to monitor the supervision you are receiving as well as the work you are doing. 6.5.1 Guidelines for Supervision of Research Students The School follows the University's Code of Practice as set out in its Quality Assurance document QA7. The following guidelines are offered as to how that Code of Practice is interpreted within the School of Management and should be read in conjunction with QA7 (see:http://internal.bath.ac.uk/quality/QA07.doc) Choice of Supervisor and Research Topic Your initial contact will be with the Director of Studies who will discuss with you your proposed research area and potential supervisors within the School. You should also have the opportunity, either face-to-face or by email, to discuss your proposed research with potential supervisors. Supervision It is extremely difficult to formalise and document what is essentially a personal relationship and the following is only offered as a framework within which that relationship can develop successfully. It lays down the expectations and responsibilities to which both the supervisor and the student have agreed in accepting the supervisory/supervised role. The relationship, however, is a negotiated one and it is expected that at the first meeting you and your supervisor(s) will discuss how you wish the supervision process to be maintained.

http://internal.bath.ac.uk/quality/QA07.doc


19

Guidance for Students

You are expected to be in contact with your supervisor(s) at regular intervals. • It is your responsibility to arrange, well in advance, meetings and contact times with your

supervisor(s). • You need to maintain the progress of your work in accordance with the stages agreed with your

supervisor, including the presentation of written material as required in sufficient time to allow the supervisor to read it and prepare feedback for your next meeting.

• Each year you and your supervisor will be expected to complete a report for the School on which you comment on your progress. This allows the Director of Studies to monitor progress and deal with any concerns.

• You must abide by the University Code of Ethics (www. bath. ac. uk/ vc. bho/ ethics.htm) when conducting your research and presenting your thesis.

• Any problems that arise that cannot be resolved by direct student-supervisor discussion should be brought to the Director of Studies.

Guidance for Supervisors Where there is joint supervision, students can expect that supervisors will liaise fully with each other. The role of the supervisor is to: • Advise, with the Director of Studies, on the preparation of the research proposal for submission

to the Faculty Board of Studies. • Negotiate with students about the form and programme of tutorial support and be accessible to

the student at other appropriate times when the student may need advice. If the supervisor is to be unavailable for any length of time (for example out of the country and unavailable by email) then he/she is responsible for agreeing with the student who should act as supervisor in his/her absence. If there is no co-supervisor to take on that role then another member will normally take on the responsibility.

• Discuss additional sources of help and advice. • Discuss and advise on the progress and time-scale of the research, including targets for

completion of work at various stages during the study period. • Require the equivalent of at least one major piece of written work each term and return this with

constructive criticism both on content and on presentation and in reasonable time. • Be responsible, together with the student, for the completion of the annual Research Student

Progress report form. • Give guidance about the nature of research and the standard expected, about the planning of the

research programme, about literature and sources and the writing of the thesis. • Encourage the submission of articles for publication. If this is mainly the students’ own work,

with some guidance from the supervisor, the article would normally be in the student’s name. If the supervisor has made a significant contribution to the writing of the article, the article may appear in both the supervisor and the student’s names.

• Read and advise on a draft of the thesis before final submission. and advise the student on the ‘readiness’ of the work for submission.

• Discuss with the student possible internal and external examiners and pass on suggestions to the Director of Studies about 6 months before intended submission.

• Remind students to notify the Director of Studies about six months before the likely submission date, accompanied by an abstract (300 words).

• Be available at the viva for discussion with the examiners.

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0pt, Bulleted + Level: 1 +Aligned at: 18 pt + Tab after: 36 pt + Indent at: 36 pt,Tabs: Not at 36 pt



20

6.6 WRITING UP AND SUBMISSION OF THESIS Deadlines for Submission / Extension of Registration A part-time DBA(HEM) candidate shall present for examination within 8 years of the date of registration. A candidate unable to do so may, before the end of the eighth year, seek an extension of registration for a period not exceeding 12 months and the Board of Studies may grant two such 12 months extensions only. Three years is the minimum period from registration to graduation for part-time study. An extension of registration must be applied for in writing to the Director of Studies at least 4 months before the end of the normal registration. The pro forma for Extension of Registration must be obtained from the DBA(HEM) administrator and must be completed. The Graduate Office will inform you of the Board of Studies’ approval. Notification of Intention to Submit Students must submit a 300 word (maximum) abstract to the Director of Studies six months before they intend submitting. The Research Committee recommends examiners to the Faculty Board and this period allows the School time to negotiate and appoint examiners. Notice of your intention to submit must be given to the graduate office by filling in form HD1 (obtainable from the DBA(HEM) administrators) at least two months in advance. 6.7 Thesis Presentation The Graduate Office produces a ‘Specification for Higher Degrees’ information sheet which gives instructions regarding thesis submission. You should obtain an updated copy in the months before you submit from the DBA(HEM) administrators. It is your responsibility to read the information sheet carefully and ensure that your thesis is submitted in the correct format. On the initial submission three copies of the thesis must be soft bound (ie glued). The University does not accept non-glued types of binding such as comb-binding. All binding is at your own expense and can either be done at the University Printing Unit (8W Level 1) or externally. Once your viva voce examination has been successfully completed, you should have three copies hardbound (according to the specifications set out in the information sheets from the Graduate Office) and then return them to the DBA(HEM) Administrator. One copy is for your supervisor, one copy is for the University Library and the other copy will be returned to you. If your thesis has been referred and you are allowed to re-submit, your examiners will let you know how long you have to make corrections and re-submit. N.B. It is important that you ensure that you follow the correct procedures for citing references and have familiarized yourself with the regulations about Cheating and Plagiarism .


21

6.8 EXAMINATION PROCEDURES Criteria for the Award of the Degree The Degree of Doctor of Business Administration in Higher Education Management shall be awarded to a candidate who shall have: • pursued a programme of study as prescribed under Regulation 16.4(b) • presented a thesis on the candidate’s advanced study and research which satisfies the examiners

as giving evidence of originality of mind and critical judgement in a particular subject; the thesis in all or in part should contain material worthy of publication; and

• passed a viva voce examination conducted by the examiners on the broader aspects of the field of research in addition to the subject of the thesis. A viva voce examination is mandatory once a Doctor of Business Administration in Higher Education Management candidate has submitted a thesis.

Where a candidate satisfies the examiners regarding the contents of the thesis but fails to satisfy the examiners at the viva voce, the candidate shall be given an opportunity of re-examination at a second viva voce examination; failure to satisfy at the second viva voce shall constitute failure of the submission of the Doctor of Business Administration in Higher Education Management. Candidates at the discretion of the examiners may be required to pass a written examination to test their knowledge of the chosen field of research. 6.9 Appointment of Examiners Your supervisor(s) will normally want to consult you about the appointment of examiners, who must be approved by the Faculty Board of Studies and Senate before the oral examination can take place. An external and an internal examiner will need to be appointed, at least 3 months prior to the date on which you intend to submit your thesis. Your supervisor will submit the name of the internal examiner and the name, address, title and CV of the external examiner to the Director of Studies in good time to be submitted to the Faculty Board of Studies and Senate. The viva voce examination usually takes place about 3 months after the thesis is submitted. Your supervisor cannot be an examiner but may attend the viva voce examination as an observer with your consent. 6.10 Viva Voce Examination The Viva Voce examination is your opportunity to defend your thesis. You are the expert on the particular focus of your study and need to convince the examiners that it contributes to the body of knowledge. Although it is an examination, with the expected nervous tension, it can also be an enjoyable debate, giving you the opportunity to discuss your work and its importance. The viva will be held in a suitable venue with informal seating arrangements. The DBA(HEM) Administrator will make sure you know the arrangements and where you are expected to be at what time. Your supervisor may attend, if you wish him/her to do so, but he/she is not allowed to participate in the discussion. You may wish him/her to be there for support or you may prefer


22

him/her not to be present. Talk to your supervisor well before your viva date about whether or not you wish him/her to be present. The external examiner will chair the session and explain to you how the process will be managed. The examiners will have copies of your thesis but take your own copy to refer to if needed. The viva will normally last about an hour but 2 hours is not unknown. The external examiner will let you know when the examination is finished and ask you to leave the room. The examiners will then discuss their recommendation. The Administrator will have arranged with you before the viva where you will wait and will fetch you when the examiners are ready to inform you of their decision.

6.11 Outcome of Examination The examiners may make the following recommendations: 1)No further corrections to the thesis are required and they recommend that the degree is awarded. 2)Minor corrections to the thesis are required and they recommend that the degree be awarded when these have been carried out to the satisfaction of the internal examiner. (Minor corrections must take no more than 30 days to complete) 3)The candidate be required to a submit a revised thesis. The revised thesis may be examined by the internal examiner only or by the internal and external examiner. The candidate may or may not be required to attend a second viva . The recommendations of the Examiners in relation to the assessment of a thesis for the award of a DBA(HEM) are considered and approved by the Faculty Board of Studies. While a student may be informed of the recommendations of the Examiners, for example following a viva voce examination, the decision is not final until it has been approved by the Faculty Board of Studies. For further details, see Regulation 16.4. 6.12 Procedures for the Review of a Board of Studies Decision (Appeals) University Regulation 17 (Conduct of Academic Reviews) explains in which circumstances a student may request that the Board of Studies reconsider a decision relating to academic failure. In summary, the following are the grounds under which such a review may be permitted: • that there exist circumstances affecting the performance of the candidate of which the Board of

Examiners have not been made aware; • that there were procedural irregularities in the conduct of the examinations or formal course

assessments (including administrative error) of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt whether the Board of Examiners would have reached their decision had the irregularities not occurred;

• that there is positive evidence of prejudice, bias or inadequate assessment on the part of one or more of the examiners;

• that there were genuine academic differences in philosophical approach or paradigms which had not been apparent when examiners were appointed on the recommendation of the Board of Studies.

It should be noted that it is not possible to appeal simply on the grounds that the outcome of the examination is not what you had hoped for or expected.



23

Any student seeking a review on any of the grounds indicated above must notify the Chair of the Faculty Board of Studies in writing within fourteen days of being notified of the decision of the Board. It is also advisable to discuss the matter with your Director of Studies, Supervisor or the Students’ Union (Vice President for Academic Affairs, email: [email protected]) as soon as possible. Where the Chair of the Faculty Board of Studies, in consultation with the Head of School, agrees that there is a prima facie case for an academic review, the Chair may consult with the Director of Studies and internal examiner to determine whether or not the student’s desired outcome is the most appropriate action. Where this is the case, the Chair may take executive action to approve the outcome without the need for a review hearing. Where the Chair, in consultation with the Head of School, agrees that there is a prima facie case for a review but executive action is deemed inappropriate, the Board of Studies will conduct a review hearing. The student will be permitted to appear in person before the Sub-Committee, accompanied by a friend or advisor. It should be noted that executive action cannot be invoked in cases where the review relates to the conferment of an award. 6.13 Graduation The University holds its Degree Congregations in July and December. You will be invited to attend the ceremony that follows the Faculty Board of Studies approval of the award of your degree. All students who are likely to be able to graduate at a particular ceremony will receive, several months prior to the date of the Degree Congregation, information from the University Student Records and Examinations Office. This information will include details of how to obtain invitations for guests and how to make arrangements for the hire of a gown. If you are unable to attend a Degree Congregation you will be permitted to graduate in absentia. Your degree certificate would, in these circumstances, be posted to you soon after the date of the Degree Congregation at which your award is conferred. Please make sure that the DBA(HEM) Administrator has your correct address. If there are any questions about Phase 1 or Phase 2 or you wish to discuss any of the issues above, please contact the Director of Studies who will be happy to help. Dr Rajani Naidoo Director of Studies Doctor of Business Administration (Higher Education Management)

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

Doctor of Business Administration (Higher Education ... › ichem › pdf › DBA_GUIDELINESCohort3.pdf · Student Handbook DBA (HEM) 5 5.1.1 Assessment of Unit 1 : Strategic Organisational