{"title":"1992-2022 年弦乐教育博士研究内容分析","authors":"Tyler J. Goehring","doi":"10.1177/19484992241239010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Kantorski examined string education doctoral research between 1935 and 1992 and highlighted potential future areas of research. In this content analysis, I examined dissertations in string education between 1992 and 2022 to determine current trends of doctoral research. I reviewed 393 string education dissertations and coded each to determine the methodology, the content categories, the participants, and the specific instrument(s) the researchers examined. Results indicate that doctoral string education research increased between 1992 and 2022. Historical ( n = 190, 24.55%) and descriptive ( n = 171, 22.09%) research methods were used most frequently. Among the seven main content categories, dissertation authors most frequently examined instructional materials ( n = 170, 21.96%) and historical and biographical topics ( n = 133, 17.18%). The teacher ( n = 66, 8.53%) and the style and genre ( n = 49, 6.33%) categories were least frequently studied. I found that DMA candidates examined instructional materials (16.02%) most frequently while PhD candidates examined students (8.53%) most frequently thus highlighting the differing priorities of performers and educators. Implications and future research directions are discussed.","PeriodicalId":36814,"journal":{"name":"String Research Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Content Analysis of Doctoral Research in String Education, 1992–2022\",\"authors\":\"Tyler J. Goehring\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19484992241239010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Kantorski examined string education doctoral research between 1935 and 1992 and highlighted potential future areas of research. In this content analysis, I examined dissertations in string education between 1992 and 2022 to determine current trends of doctoral research. I reviewed 393 string education dissertations and coded each to determine the methodology, the content categories, the participants, and the specific instrument(s) the researchers examined. Results indicate that doctoral string education research increased between 1992 and 2022. Historical ( n = 190, 24.55%) and descriptive ( n = 171, 22.09%) research methods were used most frequently. Among the seven main content categories, dissertation authors most frequently examined instructional materials ( n = 170, 21.96%) and historical and biographical topics ( n = 133, 17.18%). The teacher ( n = 66, 8.53%) and the style and genre ( n = 49, 6.33%) categories were least frequently studied. I found that DMA candidates examined instructional materials (16.02%) most frequently while PhD candidates examined students (8.53%) most frequently thus highlighting the differing priorities of performers and educators. Implications and future research directions are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36814,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"String Research Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"String Research Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19484992241239010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"String Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19484992241239010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Content Analysis of Doctoral Research in String Education, 1992–2022
Kantorski examined string education doctoral research between 1935 and 1992 and highlighted potential future areas of research. In this content analysis, I examined dissertations in string education between 1992 and 2022 to determine current trends of doctoral research. I reviewed 393 string education dissertations and coded each to determine the methodology, the content categories, the participants, and the specific instrument(s) the researchers examined. Results indicate that doctoral string education research increased between 1992 and 2022. Historical ( n = 190, 24.55%) and descriptive ( n = 171, 22.09%) research methods were used most frequently. Among the seven main content categories, dissertation authors most frequently examined instructional materials ( n = 170, 21.96%) and historical and biographical topics ( n = 133, 17.18%). The teacher ( n = 66, 8.53%) and the style and genre ( n = 49, 6.33%) categories were least frequently studied. I found that DMA candidates examined instructional materials (16.02%) most frequently while PhD candidates examined students (8.53%) most frequently thus highlighting the differing priorities of performers and educators. Implications and future research directions are discussed.