1992-2022 年弦乐教育博士研究内容分析

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Tyler J. Goehring
{"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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Kantorski考察了1935年至1992年间的弦乐教育博士研究,并强调了未来潜在的研究领域。在本内容分析中,我研究了 1992 至 2022 年间的弦乐教育博士论文,以确定当前的博士研究趋势。我查阅了 393 篇弦乐教育论文,并对每篇论文进行了编码,以确定研究方法、内容类别、参与者以及研究人员所研究的具体工具。结果表明,1992 年至 2022 年期间,博士生弦乐教育研究有所增加。历史性研究方法(n = 190,24.55%)和描述性研究方法(n = 171,22.09%)最常用。在七个主要内容类别中,论文作者最常研究的是教学材料(n = 170,21.96%)以及历史和传记主题(n = 133,17.18%)。教师类(66 人,占 8.53%)和风格与体裁类(49 人,占 6.33%)的研究频率最低。我发现,艺术硕士研究生最经常研究的是教学材料(16.02%),而博士研究生最经常研究的是学生(8.53%),这就突出了表演者和教育者不同的工作重点。本文讨论了影响和未来的研究方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
String Research Journal
String Research Journal Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信