Doctoral Research Sequence
Internal and external researchers and program leaders representing Walden University’s fields of doctoral study key stakeholders collaborated to generate a list of specific research competencies expected of all doctoral graduates from Walden.
Research competency standards of PhD programs in typical graduate programs were reviewed, as were those of external higher education associations such as The Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools and the Council of Graduate Schools, as well as several professional accrediting bodies.
The result of this extensive review and collaboration resulted in establishing 48 specific areas of competency organized around the following seven broad areas:
- Philosophy of research
- Research project design and approaches
- Quantitative research techniques
- Qualitative research techniques
- Quantitative quality assurance
- Qualitative quality assurance
- Professional practice
Doctoral Research Competencies and Related Learning Objectives
Completion of the doctoral research sequence (RSCH 8110, RSCH 8210, and RSCH 8310) and the additional advanced-level courses required within each student’s program will enable students to achieve mastery of the specific set of these research competencies required for their field of study and professional goals.
Topic Area and Competency: Philosophy of Research
Listed are the competencies for the Philosophy of Research topic area. Each competency lists an example learning objective.
- Empiricism: Identify the influence of empiricism on quantitative research methodology.
- Positivism and post-positivism: Explain how the scientific method is based on positivism and post-positivism.
- Interpretivism: Contrast interpretivism with positivism.
- Constructivism: Contrast constructivism with determinism.
- Deconstructivism or critical theory: Explain how critical theory research approaches use the concepts of power and justice.
Topic Area and Competency: Research Project Design and Approaches
Listed are the competencies for the Research Project Design and Approaches topic area. Each competency lists an example learning objective.
- Formulating the research question: Utilize a gap in past research on a topic to generate a testable research question.
- Quantitative/qualitative distinctions: Determine the types of research questions most appropriately addressed by quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method designs.
- Experimental research: Explain why the experimental method is required for determining cause-effect relationships.
- Quasi-experimental research: Identify the advantages and disadvantages of key quasi-experimental designs.
- Non-experimental designs (descriptive, correlational): Determine when it is appropriate to use non-experimental quantitative designs.
- Program evaluation: Distinguish program evaluation from other approaches to research.
- Case studies: Utilize case study findings to generate testable hypotheses.
- Phenomenology: Explain the purpose of research from a phenomenological perspective.
- Ethnographic methods: Contrast ethnography from other approaches to qualitative research.
- Grounded theory methods: Identify the key assumptions of grounded theory research.
- Historical research: Identify multiple sources of archival data relevant to their professional field and the limitations associated with such data.
- Action research: Explain why the advantages of action research may also be limitations.
- Narrative inquiry: Describe multiple forms of stories used in narrative analysis and how the “story” differs from a case study.
Topic Area and Competency: Quantitative Research Techniques
Listed are the competencies for the Quantitative Research Techniques topic area. Each competency lists an example learning objective.
- Descriptive statistics: Know the definitions of mean, mode, and median and describe the situations where each should be used to describe the “average” value.
- Probability distributions: Know the characteristics of a normal distribution and explain how those characteristics are used in hypothesis testing with reference to the Central Limit Theorem.
- Hypothesis testing: Correctly test a hypothesis using quantitative data. Correctly interpret the results of that test with reference to Type I and II errors.
- Multivariate analysis appropriate to field: Describe how multivariate analyses are used in the students’ professional field.
- Correlation: Correctly calculate and interpret a Pearson correlation coefficient.
- Non-parametric methods: Understand the concept of rank and how it used in non-parametric statistics that test the difference between two or more groups.
- Linear regression: Know the assumptions of and correctly interpret ordinary least squares linear regression.
- Quantitative analysis software (SPSS): Construct a data set using statistical software. Use that software to produce descriptive and inferential statistics.
Topic Area and Competency: Qualitative Research Techniques
Listed are the competencies for the Qualitative Research Techniques topic area. Each competency lists an example learning objective.
- Field notes: Demonstrate skills in preparing field notes.
- Pilot studies/field studies: Identify different ways to collect qualitative data (i.e., individual or group interviewing; participant-observer journaling) and compare the relative tradeoffs of each approach.
- Document (content) analysis: Organize and analyze data through classification and coding.
- Observation strategies: Observe individuals, groups, objects, and settings in great detail.
- Interviewing: Understand how to develop an interview protocol and what is necessary for conducting effective interviews.
- Focus groups: Understand how to conduct focus groups in open-ended question and structured activity formats.
- Questionnaires: Demonstrate an understanding of conducting research using questionnaires.
- Journaling: Identify different ways to collect qualitative data (i.e., individual or group interviewing; participant-observer journaling).
- Identifying themes in qualitative data: Analyze data for meaning and make connections across categories.
- Qualitative analysis software (Nvivo-NUDIST, Atlas): Produce multiple codes for a set of documents within qualitative analysis software. Use that software to show the relationship between at least two codes.
Topic Area and Competency: Quantitative Quality Assurance
Listed are the competencies for the Quantitative Quality Assurance topic area. Each competency lists an example learning objective.
- Validity: Describe what is meant by validity and how to assess external and internal validity.
- Reliability: Describe what is meant by reliability and how to assess external and internal reliability.
- Sampling (random and deliberate): Define a random sample and explain why a researcher may use non-random samples in research.
Topic Area and Competency: Qualitative Quality Assurance
Listed are the competencies for the Qualtitative Quality Assurance topic area. Each competency lists an example learning objective.
- Trustworthiness: Describe specific ways in which qualitative research is judged as rigorous.
- Authenticity: Discuss “fairness” in the integration of one’s own and others’ perspectives into the research process.
- Sampling (purposive): Identify specific strategies within purposive sampling and explain why each might be used.
Topic Area and Competency: Professional Practice
Listed are the competencies for the Professional Practice topic area. Each competency lists an example learning objective.
- Disseminating research to professional audiences (e.g., conferences): Identify at least two ways for disseminating research in their professional field and describe scholarly expectations associated with each.
- Human subjects’ protection: Explain the legal and ethical basis of human subjects’ protection along with the basic rights of participants participating in any research study.
- Grant-writing: Describe at least two sources of grants for conducting research in their field and basic requirements for securing grants from each source.
- Integrating research with social change activity: Describe past, current, and future potential contributions of research in their professional field to the public good.
- Working with stakeholders (e.g., community-based research): Identify potential non-academic stakeholders in research from their professional field along with specific considerations in working with each stakeholder.
- Professional writing: Utilize appropriate conventions for professional writing when reviewing, reporting, and interpreting research findings.
Registering, Completing, and Receiving Credit for the Research Sequence Courses
Students register for the Research Sequence courses using the regular course registration process.
Institutional Review Board
Walden University is committed to conducting its research involving human subjects under rigorous ethical principles.
The university’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) has been established to comply with existing regulations of the federal government. Specifically, the university follows the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects (45 CFR 46).
University research ethics forms and guidance can be found at the Institutional Review Board web page.
Scope of Authority
The Institutional Review Board (IRB) is required to review research proposals, funded or not, that are prepared by students, instructors, and staff (“Researchers”). The only categories of research that do not need to be submitted for IRB approval are literature reviews and hypothetical research designs. For all others, the IRB is responsible for ensuring all the following standards are met:
- Risks are justified in terms of related benefits to the participants and society.
- Participants engage in research willingly and knowingly to the extent possible.
- Research methods are the safest possible and are consistent with sound research design.
- All stakeholders’ privacy is protected.
- Research is monitored.
- Researchers share study results appropriately with stakeholders.
- Researchers use other researchers’ data collection tools appropriately.
All research projects involving access, collection, or analysis of data (whether from surveys, interviews, observation, student or employee work products, or records of any type) must be reviewed and approved by the IRB. Moreover, no member of the university community may commence any such research data collection until it has been approved by the IRB.
To accomplish these purposes, Researchers are required to complete the appropriate applications and obtain the board’s approval prior to beginning data collection. Notwithstanding the exceptions listed above, the university’s policy requires an ethics review of research methods by the IRB whether human subjects are involved or not. Applying the U.S. federal government’s definition, research is defined as systematic investigation (i.e., the gathering and analysis of information) designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge.
Membership
The Institutional Review Board (IRB) consists of staff and faculty from each of Walden’s major research areas as well as one member not affiliated with the university.
The members of the IRB are nominated by the school and college leadership and are appointed by the executive director of the Office of Research and Doctoral Services.
Selection criteria include
- Content expertise
- Research experience
- Knowledge of professional and academic ethics
The IRB meets weekly and requires a quorum to take a vote. A quorum is considered present at a meeting when three-fifths of the members are in attendance. A majority vote can approve, approve with stipulations, or disapprove a research proposal.
IRB decisions cannot be appealed, but the IRB chair will work with the researcher(s) to get a proposal into an approvable state.
Information Required for Review
Information provided to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) should be written in a nontechnical manner and should be suitable for understanding by a diverse audience.
While the information below is required, students must consult the Institutional Review Board web page for a full description of the IRB application and review process.
It includes:
- A brief overview of the study, including research questions and/or hypotheses
- A description of how participants will be recruited and selected for participation, including any advertisements, recruitment letters or scripts, and financial remuneration offered to participants
- Statements of how informed consent will be obtained and how participants will be informed of the voluntary nature of their participation, including the right to opt out of the study without penalty, and the process of expressing concerns to the primary investigator
- An explanation of the research methodology to be used, including copies of all data collection instruments (e.g., interview protocols, survey instruments, standardized and non-standardized questionnaires)
- An explanation of how collected data will be stored and destroyed, including audio recordings
- An explanation of what risks are involved, how participants are protected, whether risks to participants are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits, if any, and the importance of the knowledge to be gained
Doctoral Student Responsibilities Regarding Research Data
- In support of upholding the university’s research quality and ethical standards, a doctoral student’s raw dataset, final dataset, and analysis process must be electronically available to doctoral study committee members. Raw data is the original form of the data such as interview recordings or survey responses prior to cleaning steps like removing outliers and dealing with missing data. Any data originally collected via paper/tapes must be available in digital format.* The final dataset used in the analysis (e.g., verbatim transcripts, cleaned dataset) and documentation of the analysis process (e.g., qualitative codes, data dictionary, statistical output) must also be shared electronically with committee members. Time frames and methods for sharing datasets should be specified by the student and committee chair in the term plan.
- A doctoral student is required to keep careful records (i.e., recruitment and data collection log) tracking all recruitment, data collection, and data management steps. Typically, a log includes the date of each recruitment or data collection task (e.g., invitations sent, interview, observation session, survey deployment to different participant groups, dataset access, dataset sharing,** etc.). Content, time frame, and frequency of log updates should be specified by the student and committee chair in the term plan. Sample recruitment and data collection logs are available on the IRB website.
- To support and guide the data collection process, the IRB and committee members may review the raw data, final dataset, logs, or term plan any time and require rectification of any data collection steps, as needed, to meet ethical and quality standards. Similarly, the committee members may also review the analysis process at any time to ensure that the analysis meets the university’s standards.
- At their discretion, a committee member may require that a student add a practice data collection phase in the data collection protocol to ensure the student is adequately prepared to collect data. Examples: The student may be required to conduct a practice interview with a friend, share the recording and transcript with the committee member, receive feedback on interviewing technique or other skills, and perform another practice round if needed, before continuing to data collection for analysis. Or a committee member could require that the first actual interview with a participant be transcribed and submitted to the committee for approval before the student can continue to schedule other interviews.
- The dataset(s) must be retained by the student in a confidential, secure manner for 5 years beyond CAO approval unless otherwise indicated*** by the IRB. Only university staff and committee-approved transcribers may have access to the raw dataset. University staff are already bound to confidentiality standards, but transcribers must enter into a confidentiality agreement with the student. Presentations and publications (in ProQuest, ScholarWorks, and other platforms) may include quoted or paraphrased participant responses if participant and partner organization identifiers are removed, as per the study’s confidentiality terms. Publishing the full transcripts is only permitted if the IRB’s explicit approval to publish transcripts is obtained and noted along with the IRB approval number in the publication. Other researchers requesting the data can only be given access to a de-identified dataset (with all names and other identifiers removed).
* Supervising faculty and staff can request that data be shared via screenshare, email, or upload to a secure platform such as Taskstream or password-protected cloud storage.
** Students analyzing preexisting data from a third party source (“Third Party Data”), are responsible for complying with any notification requirements specified by the Third Party Data source to allow the IRB and doctoral study committee members access to the Third Party Data in accordance with this policy.
*** The IRB may approve exceptions to the requirements of this policy on a case-by-case basis through the IRB application review process. In some cases, the IRB might approve for sensitive interview recordings to be destroyed immediately after transcription to provide greater protection of participant identities. Or, if a researcher is using pre-existing data from a third party source, the third party providing the data may have additional or different requirements that may conflict with this 5 year retention policy. It is the student’s responsibility to specify any data use or retention requirements for Third Party Data in the IRB application.
Dissertation and Doctoral Capstone Credit
Doctor of Philosophy Programs
Students in PhD programs are enrolled in dissertation courses each term that they are working on completing their dissertation. Course credit is earned for each individual dissertation course successfully completed. If students complete the minimum dissertation credit required for their program but have not yet completed the dissertation process, they are continuously registered for the dissertation course until they receive final approval of their dissertation. In the rare event that a student completes his or her dissertation before earning the minimum required dissertation credits, only the chief academic officer can approve dissertation credit waivers. Students must be registered in the final term for which they receive approval of their dissertation. For program-specific information regarding dissertation credit, students should refer to the program and course information provided in the catalog.
Professional Doctorate Programs
Most professional doctorate programs have a capstone requirement that varies from that of the dissertation. Students in professional doctorate programs must complete a doctoral study, capstone, or project. The total credit requirement varies by program and is in addition to any practicum or field experience requirements. As with the dissertation, students are enrolled in a doctoral capstone course each term until they have met the total requirements for the program. For program-specific information regarding doctoral capstone credit, students should refer to the program and course information provided in the catalog.
KAM and Mixed-Model Programs
Students enrolled in a KAM or Mixed-Model program follow the same model of continuous registration as students in PhD programs. Students are continuously registered in a Research Forum course during the completion of the KAM and the dissertation. Students are responsible for completing all KAM coursework prior to engaging in the dissertation stage of their program. A dissertation committee cannot be formed or active until the student has completed all of their KAM requirements. For program-specific information regarding KAM and/or dissertation credit, students should refer to the program and course information provided in the catalog.
Please note, for all programs, students must be actively registered in the appropriate course in order to conduct research for a doctoral research artifact (dissertation/doctoral capstone/KAM) or to receive support services from Walden University.
Doctoral Capstone Completion Process
There are several milestones within the stages of the doctoral capstone or project process. For a visual of the stages and milestones, refer to the Doctoral Capstone Development document on the Office of Research and Doctoral Services website. Students should use the Doctoral Degree Coach—an interactive, virtual tool—to stay on track and complete their doctoral capstone or project. Students can access the Doctoral Degree Coach on the homepage of their capstone/project course, or on the Doctoral Degree Coach webpage.
All students enrolled in a Walden University doctoral program will proceed through the following stages and milestones as they complete their capstone:
Doctoral Capstone Development | Stages and Milestone
A doctoral capstone (e.g., dissertation, project study, etc.) is required in the final phase of a student’s doctoral journey. During capstone development, students integrate their program of study into an in-depth exploration culminating in the completion of a doctoral research study. Students complete the study independently, with the support of a capstone committee, and following the guidance from program capstone resources and the Doctoral Degree Coach™. Once enrolled in the university capstone course, students are registered each term until the successful completion of all stages.
Capstone Stages
Progress Milestones within the Stages
Prospectus
The Doctoral Prospectus is a brief document that provides preliminary information about the capstone research. It serves as the tentative plan for developing the Proposal and is evaluated to ensure doctoral-level work (e.g., feasibility, alignment, etc.) by the committee chair, second committee member, and a program-level designee. Program-level approval is required to progress to the Proposal.
Proposal
The Doctoral Proposal consists of the initial chapters or sections of the capstone and an APA-style reference list. The Proposal presents a detailed plan of the proposed research and describes a specific problem, the related literature, and the intended research methodology. The Proposal is evaluated by the committee to ensure doctoral-level work (e.g., an exhaustive review of literature, alignment, etc.). Students complete an oral defense, and the Proposal Stage culminates with the research ethics review process. IRB approval is required to progress to the Final Study.
- For more information on the oral defense milestone, see the Office of Research and Doctoral Services website under Oral Defense.
- For more information on the IRB approval process, consult the Institutional Review Board (IRB): Research Ethics webpage.
Final Study
After the IRB application has been approved, students conduct their research, collect and analyze data, report findings, and draw conclusions. With the guidance of the committee, students write the remaining chapters or sections of the capstone as well as the document abstract. The Final Study is evaluated by the committee to ensure doctoral-level work (e.g., accurate results, alignment, etc.). Students complete the form and style review process and an oral defense. The Final Study stage culminates in the Chief Academic Officer (CAO) designee review process. CAO approval is required for capstone completion.
- For more information on the Form and Style Review, consult the Form and Style webpage.
- For more information on the oral defense milestone, see the Office of Research and Doctoral Services website under Oral Defense.
Doctoral Committee Member Roles and Functions
Faculty members in Walden University doctoral programs who accept the duty of serving on a dissertation or doctoral study committee assume a dual responsibility of high importance. One part is service to their students; the other is service to the academic practice, discipline, and professional field to which the dissertation is related. For the first part, expectations concerning the faculty service to be performed are determined by students’ needs, and by university academic policy pertaining to how these needs are to be addressed. For the second, expectations are set both by university academic policy and by policies and practice that frame acceptable work in the discipline and professional field at large.
The committee’s guidance to students will be “team advice.” Any written dialogue between a student and a committee member is shared within the committee. Committee members recognize that issues may be controversial, divide opinions, or otherwise cause disagreement. When conflicts arise, the committee members are obligated to restrict the discussion to only other committee members and the committee chairperson, to avoid involving students in disputes or disagreements among themselves. The committee chairperson will act as a mediator to resolve the situation and obtain a consensus.
Walden intends that dissertation/doctoral study committee members work as a team, directly guiding students through the proposal, research and analysis, and ultimately the final oral presentation. Although the committee members are expected to support and facilitate students’ progress through their doctoral capstone project, students are ultimately responsible for preparing a dissertation/doctoral study that meets the rigors of academic excellence.
Required Roles in Walden Doctoral Committees
Most Walden doctoral capstone (e.g. dissertation, doctoral study, etc.) committees will be comprised of a committee chair and co-chair/second committee member.
Chair
The committee chairperson leads the committee members as they work with students on their doctoral capstone projects. As a result, the chairs are primarily responsible for ensuring that such projects meet all of Walden’s requirements including those pertaining to content coverage, methodology, research ethics, and form and style. Moreover, they are responsible for making sure that the work of committee fulfills expectations of service to the student, the academic discipline(s), and professional field(s) of practice involved. Chairs must lead, monitor, coordinate, and assess the progress of the capstone research from start to finish.
In order for the chair to provide effective leadership of capstone committees, committee members must individually apprise the committee chairperson of their respective expertise, if not already known or any special knowledge that they may be able to contribute to the student’s capstone project. Committee members must contact the committee chairperson before beginning to work with students.
Chairs must be from the program in which students are enrolled, with further specificity required from some schools.
Second Member
The second member collaborates with chair throughout capstone completion process to provide overall guidance about the acceptability of the capstone taking into account:
- Walden capstone rubric requirements
- Norms of program and profession
- Form and style requirements
In addition, between the chair and the second member, the following functions must be fulfilled. The functions may be split between these two members, or the chair or second member could perform both roles.
Methodology Expert
- Provides feedback to student on the following:
- Proposed research design including appropriateness for addressing the problem statement and research questions or for testing stated hypotheses
- Selection of specific methodology
- Selection of a sample of appropriate characteristics and size
- Oversee implementation of the selected methodology, assuring compliance with the following:
- Program/professional norms
- Generally accepted ethical and moral principles regarding human subjects
- Provides constructive criticism about the following:
- Data collection and analysis
- Presentation of the data and the conclusions drawn from the analyses
Content Expert
- Assists students with the following:
- Conceptualizing the research issues
- Preparing a literature review that provides a comprehensive summary of current knowledge and identifies the gap therein
- Identifying all variables and potential relationships
- Articulating a clearly defined research question
- Establishing the significance of the topic and the potential of the study to contribute to positive social change
- Provides feedback on the following:
- Degree to which assumptions and limitations impact upon the research conclusions
- Comprehensiveness of the literature review and theoretical base of the study (if appropriate)
- Potential for research outcomes to contribute to positive social change
- Overall significance of the research findings or outcomes
External, Non-Walden Dissertation/Doctoral Study Committee Member
In some rare cases, the committee chairperson may conclude that special expertise is needed to appropriately mentor or evaluate a specific aspect of a student’s research topic. In such instances, an external fourth member may be added to the committee. The qualifications of this member shall include all of the following:
- Expertise on the research topic, not otherwise available within the Walden faculty
- Possession of the highest academic degree awarded in the field
- A record of publications in scholarly journals closely associated with the topic area
- A record of guiding the development of doctoral dissertations in the topic area
- Evidence of current, active involvement in research related to the topic area
A request for such a member must be accompanied by a copy of the proposed member’s CV, and a letter from the student including all of the points above. An external member of a dissertation/doctoral study supervisory committee has the same rights and responsibilities as any other member. Review and approval of a non-Walden member nominated to a dissertation/doctoral study supervisory committee is in the purview of the program chair and/or dean of the student’s program. Nomination of such a member is initiated by the student, approved by the committee chairperson, and then evaluated by the program chair, who determines if the request shall be approved.
For more information on the specific responsibilities of each capstone committee member at each point in the capstone completion process, visit the Capstone Committee Process webpage.
Guidance for Walden Students on the Use of External Consultants for Capstone Projects
Although the doctoral capstone project can seem daunting at the outset, the academic programs at Walden are designed to prepare students to complete their own projects. The need for added support is understandable, but completed capstones must represent the students’ work and learning, and demonstrate their skills as a holder of doctoral degrees. Students who choose to utilize support beyond services offered by the university need to be mindful of the pitfalls and potential problems that can arise.
In today’s marketplace, there are some unscrupulous writers, scholars, and statisticians that cross boundaries and interfere with the originality of student work. The information below is provided to give clarity on this subject in relation to student and faculty expectations and support all students in selecting support options.
Editors
In working with editors, students should use these resources only for editing and clarifying, not for the synthesis of ideas or the generation of new concepts. Having someone else write parts of the document is a form of plagiarism, and it puts the entire project at risk.
Statisticians and Other Research Consultants
Research consultants’ services should be used for tutoring of statistical concepts and reviewing data analysis strategies; these are not services for designing the research, conducting the analyses, or interpreting the results. To have a successful oral presentation of the capstone, students need to be able to explain and defend every aspect of their work and to demonstrate an understanding of all concepts, synthesis, and analysis.
Caution and Support for Students
Unfortunately, a growing number of doctoral students hire editorial and statistical services from individuals and/or companies who make claims to deliver a product but fail to do so. In some cases, services performed by others may put students in a position that can jeopardize their status at the university. Walden University will not be able to support or accommodate students who become victims of misleading or unscrupulous consultants. Students should apply the guidance provided here when considering an outside consultant. Prior to seeking external resources, students should first consult the menu of support options available at no cost from the Office of Academic Support and the Office of Research and Doctoral Services Doctoral Methodology Advising.
Faculty Recommendations
Faculty members may suggest the use of an advisor or consultant when students display consistent editorial difficulties on document drafts, but they should not require students to use an external consultant and cannot require the use of a specific consultant.
Selection and Appointment of Committees
Chairs and Second Members
PhD Committees
PhD students request the formation of their dissertation committee as part of an assignment during a course in their program. Using information that students share about their dissertation interests, program leaders match them with an appropriate committee chair and second committee member. Students may request a specific faculty member to serve on their committee; these requests are subject to program approval. Those requests are reviewed by program leaders to ensure the faculty member’s availability and appropriate expertise. Students will be notified about who is on their committee prior to the term in which they start their dissertation courses.
Professional Doctorate* Committees
Students in professional doctorate programs will have committee members appointed for them. Using information that students share about their capstone/project interests, program leaders match them with an appropriate committee after students have reached specific milestones within the program. Students will be notified about who is on their committee along with the next steps in the capstone/project process.
*Professional Doctorate programs include: EdD, DBA, DIT, DHA, DHS, DNP, DPA, DrPH, DSW, and PsyD
For information on changing one’s chair or second member after a committee is approved, students should consult the relevant Dissertation Guidebook or the Doctoral Study Guidebook for the program.
Doctoral Capstone Project Inclusion in the Institutional Repository
Notice of Right to Distribute
To assure transparency in doctoral training, Walden University reserves the right to distribute capstone products via the institutional repository (IR). Students cannot opt-out of IR participation. Capstones will be available in the repository as “Gratis Open Access”—the content is available to read free-of-charge, though its reuse is still restricted. Authors retain the copyright for their capstone product. Capstone products subject to this policy include dissertations, doctoral studies, project studies, and any equivalent documents that fulfill a doctoral capstone requirement.
Capstone Product Content Distributed in the Repository
- Every capstone product will be catalogued in the IR upon receipt from ProQuest/UMI.
- The catalog record will include the title, author name, year of doctoral degree conferral, degree earned, the name of the committee chair, and the abstract.
- By default, the full text of the capstone product will be available in the repository upon receipt from ProQuest/UMI.
Embargo Option
Authors may opt to restrict access to the full text of their capstone in the IR by requesting a 1-year embargo period. The student will receive instructions for electing this option from the Office of Research and Doctoral Services along with other capstone completion documentation. If an embargo is requested:
- The embargo period begins upon receipt of the document from ProQuest/UMI.
- The full text of the capstone product will become available in the repository at the end of the embargo period, one year after receipt.
- A catalog record is created for the document upon receipt from ProQuest/UMI; i.e., information about the document will be discoverable in the repository even during the embargo period.