Sunday, November 18, 2012

Warming up for DBA exam

I see that I've hardly written anything about the first course in the DBA degree - Introduction to Business Research 1. This course gives an introduction to the structure of the doctoral degree then concentrates on the first piece of work that the candidate (we are no longer students!) has to produce - the research proposal. Chapters in the course discuss the background of the proposal (including a very interesting chapter on the philosophy of research), culminating in a chapter on the structure of the research proposal itself.

I had been reading the course material with great interest, always considering how the material applies to my chosen area (what is my research question? what are my hypotheses?). But as there are only six chapters to read, I found that I had read the whole course twice two months before the exam. As a result, I almost totally ignored the course for a month. A week ago, I awoke with a start and realised that soon I am to be examined on this material. It's time to get hard core.

The most important thought which I had a few days ago was that I am not to be examined on my research proposal but rather on how well I have learned the course: two completely different things. My first step, then, was to download a few previous exams and check both the examiners' solutions and selected students' solutions. After reading a few of these, I went back in time to the final stages of the Strategic Planning course, in which the lecturer would hand us an old exam and ask us for the solution, which was according to a template that he devised.

After examining a few papers, it became clear that the exam always consists of three questions: the first (50%) presents a research proposal and the examinee is to critique it. The other two questions (25% each) require essays on subjects such as research methodology, philosophy and time planning. The research proposal question can be answered by creating a template and then following it; the proposal consists of fourteen different sections (abstract, research question, research methodology, timetable, ethics, deliverables et al.) and most of these sections have a pre-defined structure. Thus it should be fairly easy to deliver a critique after memorising which points should be referenced in which section (the ethics, deliverables and appendix sections are particularly easy).

I spent most of my study time yesterday creating such a template and then answering - writing out in full - one such exam question according to the template. I intend to answer a few more questions in the next few days in order to fix the template in my mind. Writing the answer out in full hand is a very important aid to fixing the answer; I very rarely write anything by hand these days and certainly not two page essays. As opposed to the MBA courses, I don't attend lectures and write notes on the coursework, so at the moment I have no muscle memory; I consider this to be very important.

When I need some variety, I will look at the other questions in the exams and try to prepare answers in advance - for example, the course text devotes a few pages to the advantages and disadvantages of the positivism and phenomenology approaches (I will have to practice writing phenomenology and methodology!) and I imagine that there will be a need to discuss them at some point in the exam.

That said, there are some subjects which seem fairly obvious: I am sure that I could write a competent essay about time planning (Gantt charts, etc) without having to read the material again; I did achieve a high mark in Project Management, after all!

No comments: