Details: Before beginning the synthesis process, it is important to become acquainted with the analysis and comparison of empirical articles. In the previous assignment, you engaged with the Comparison Matrix, a tool for analysis and comparison of empirical articles. In this assignment, you will take the next step toward synthesis and write about your observations of the articles you compared using the Comparison Matrix.  General Requirements: Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment: · Refer to the Comparison Matrix you completed · Review: Weidman, J. C., & Stein, E. L. (2003). Socialization of doctoral students to academic norms. Research in Higher Education, 44(6), 641-656. · Review: Baker, V., & Lattuca, L. R. (2010). Developmental networks and learning: toward an interdisciplinary perspective on identity development during doctoral study. Studies in Higher Education, 35(7), 807-827. · Review: Visser, L., Visser, Y. L., & Schlosser, C. (2003). Critical thinking distance education and traditional education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(4), 401-407. · Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. Directions: Locate the Comparison Matrix you completed in the Module 2 assignment. Using the outline you developed, the information from the Comparison Matrix. Write a paper (1,000 words) that compares all three of the articles. Do that by including the following: 1. A statement of common elements and themes addressed in each of the three articles. 2. A statement of the conclusions that can be drawn when the articles are taken together as a single entity. What is the overall message of the group of articles? WRITING ASSIGNMENT The paper should include the following: WORD COUNT: 1500 words max. Introduction. The introduction should engage the reader with a strong opening statement. It should also provide context for the paper, introduce the researchers and their studies (including the purpose of the studies), and include a thesis statement that serves as a roadmap for the reader.   Comparison of Research Questions. Open the section with a sentence that engages the reader and gives a peak into your analysis. Please discuss the main ideas behind the research questions, as well as the researcher’s approach to exploring these questions. Did they use mixed methods, quantitative, or qualitative methods? Mention the number of hypotheses (quantitative) or research questions (qualitative), but do not list the research questions. Remember to compare the approaches and discuss similarities and differences. Comparison of Literature Reviews. This section should analyze the research the authors use to support their studies. Do not take this section lightly. You want to point out the theory and/or main research the author’s used to set up their study, and if possible mention why. Did all the studies take the same approach, such as using similar authors for support? Do they al.

1. Details:
Before beginning the synthesis process, it is important to
become acquainted with the analysis and comparison of
empirical articles. In the previous assignment, you engaged with
the Comparison Matrix, a tool for analysis and comparison of
empirical articles. In this assignment, you will take the next
step toward synthesis and write about your observations of the
articles you compared using the Comparison Matrix.
General Requirements:
Use the following information to ensure successful completion
of the assignment:
· Refer to the Comparison Matrix you completed
· Review: Weidman, J. C., & Stein, E. L. (2003). Socialization
of doctoral students to academic norms. Research in Higher
Education, 44(6), 641-656.
· Review: Baker, V., & Lattuca, L. R. (2010). Developmental
networks and learning: toward an interdisciplinary perspective
on identity development during doctoral study. Studies in
Higher Education, 35(7), 807-827.
· Review: Visser, L., Visser, Y. L., & Schlosser, C. (2003).
Critical thinking distance education and traditional education.
Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(4), 401-407.
· Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their
writing assignments.
Directions:
Locate the Comparison Matrix you completed in the Module 2
assignment. Using the outline you developed, the information
from the Comparison Matrix. Write a paper (1,000 words) that
compares all three of the articles. Do that by including the
following:
1. A statement of common elements and themes addressed in
each of the three articles.
2. A statement of the conclusions that can be drawn when the
articles are taken together as a single entity. What is the overall

2. message of the group of articles?
WRITING ASSIGNMENT
The paper should include the following:
WORD COUNT: 1500 words max.
Introduction. The introduction should engage the reader with a
strong opening statement. It should also provide context for the
paper, introduce the researchers and their studies (including the
purpose of the studies), and include a thesis statement that
serves as a roadmap for the reader.
Comparison of Research Questions. Open the section with a
sentence that engages the reader and gives a peak into your
analysis. Please discuss the main ideas behind the research
questions, as well as the researcher’s approach to exploring
these questions. Did they use mixed methods, quantitative, or
qualitative methods? Mention the number of hypotheses
(quantitative) or research questions (qualitative), but do not list
the research questions. Remember to compare the approaches
and discuss similarities and differences.
Comparison of Literature Reviews. This section should analyze
the research the authors use to support their studies. Do not take
this section lightly. You want to point out the theory and/or
main research the author’s used to set up their study, and if
possible mention why. Did all the studies take the same
approach, such as using similar authors for support? Do they all
provide a comprehensive history of research? Or do they only
use more recent work (last 10 years)? Both approaches can be
good depending on focus of study. The actual number of
references is not that important, however it would be apropos to
compare the scope of the studies without the actual use of
numbers.
Comparison of Sample Populations. Provide the important facts,
but then analyze the sample populations. Please focus on
available demographics, such as gender, age, education, income,
etc…Also, analyze the size and response rate of the studies as
well as whether or not the populations are homogenous or
heterogeneous.

3. Comparison of Limitations. This is the area where your analysis
will shine. Please understand that all research has shortcomings.
Sometimes researchers will reveal some of these limitations, but
usually there are more present than shared. Please read the
articles and look for bias that is present in the studies.
Sometimes it is the researchers’ fault and other times it happens
because of the random population selected. If you read
something and there seems to be something missing… you are
probably right. This area requires you to think critically about
the articles. I recommend using sub-headings in this section.
Once you have provided a brief intro paragraph break down into
the following sub-headings: Researcher Identified Limitations
and Additional Limitations.
Comparison of Results. This section examines the researchers’
results and discusses whether or not the hypotheses were
supported or their objectives were fulfilled
Conclusion and Recommendations for Future Research. The
conclusion section should refer back to the Introduction and
wrap up your paper. It is not a restatement of the authors’
conclusions – it is your conclusions based on your analysis. The
recommendations section should be rooted in the study and not
something too far outside the scope. I would begin by looking at
some of the limitations and generate your recommendations
from there.
Comparison Matrix
Article 1
Article 2
Article 3
Title/Author(s)
Socialization of doctoral students to academic norms
Weidman, J. C., & Stein, E. L. (2003).
Developmental networks and learning: toward an
interdisciplinary perspective on identity development during
doctoral study.
Baker, V., & Lattuca, L. R. (2010).

4. Critical thinking distance education and traditional education.
Visser, L., Visser, Y. L., & Schlosser, C. (2003).
Purpose of the study
What is the author’s rationale for selecting this topic? Does he
build a strong case?
The study aims to address student socialization in regards to the
effect that socialization has on a student’s success. The study
also proposes that a student’s relationship with the professors
plays a part in the success or basic foundation of academics in
which they take with them throughout their entire collegiate
career, either becoming successful or in essence setting a
standard or falling short due to a lack of social interaction with
other students and the faculty.
The purpose of this study is to see how networks of
development and the perspective of a sociocultural element can
be combined to create an “interdisciplinary” approach that leads
to the formation of identity.
The purpose of this study is to think about the differences
between traditional and non-traditional or “distant” education.
The idea of critical thinking is to figure out how to incorporate
it into those in a higher program of study and what are the
contributing factors that inhibit a student’s critical thinking
skills in distance learning.
Research Question(s)

5. What question(s) does the author present?
The question that is posed is; How does a student’s interaction
with faculty on a social level create an environment that is
supportive. Another question is; How does this social
interaction effect the foundation for potential research
productivity among graduate and doctoral level students?
How does combining the key tenants and the developmental
networks of sociocultural perspective remedy the limitations
that are found in them individually?
The question that is posed is; what are the factors and
conditions that inhibit critical thinking in a higher level of
education in addition to distance education?
Literature Review
How is this organized? What are the main themes found in the
review? Who are the main authors used?
The paper is well written, other than some grammatical errors,
and discusses items thoroughly and is easy to follow. The
themes I find are the dimensions and the precise nature of the
scholarly role, the purpose of a post baccalaureate degree, the
framework of socialization in education, the various dimensions
of a professional setting as opposed to a collegiate setting, the
relationship between knowledge and professional practices, and
contributing factors.
The paper is written at a more professional level than the first
and has clear headings and themes. The first theme is graduate
education is preparing one for academic careers. Another is
relationship between knowledge and professional practice. The
third one is about the relationship between knowledge and
professionalism.
The author went around in circles, using less than desirable
grammar and vocabulary, and actually created a sense of fear
that if these are the standard research studies in a doctoral level

6. program, then the future doesn’t look very bright, or at least
smart. The integration of critical thinking factors, traditional
and higher education settings, what prevents critical thinking in
distance education, and opportunities given to distance learners.
Sample Population(s)
What group(s) is/are being studied?
Graduate students, doctoral students, and the faculty.
Faculty, Doctoral students, Mentors, and social networks.
Higher levels of education, and students learning through
distance education.
Limitations
What are the limitations of the study? Why can it only
encompass so much?
The main limitation that is visible is that this study was only
done in the area of social science, or social studies. It is bias
because the research does not include all social networks, but
rather those in the immediate area of the writer. The actual
theory that socialization contributes to the success of a student
throughout their career is a huge assessment and cannot be
encapsulated by looking at one group of students.
The limitation that I saw was the lack of scholarly research in
the study. The more I read, the more bored I became only
because it appeared that the author was repeating himself and
going over the same thing but using different words.
There is nothing there for the any opportunities for traditional

7. students in the area of critical thinking, so the study is bias.
One cannot base the study on distance learning if there is not a
fair or equal playing field to begin with and additions or options
or support to both traditional and distance learning.
Results/ Conclusions
What did the author find through the study? Was the original
question answered?
I think that the author found what he was looking for however
his study is bias due to the limitations put on the study from
only one area of research.
The author found it difficult to write up this study and the
original question was not even answered.
The reading was dry and was difficult to follow. It was more
frustrating than anything. I completely lost track of the main
idea of the study several times and the themes became
segmented and hard to finish. I could not even say if the author
answered their original question.
WRITING ASSIGNMENT
WORD COUNT: 1500 words max.
Introduction. The introduction should engage the reader with a
strong opening statement. It should also provide context for the
paper, introduce the researchers and their studies (including the
purpose of the studies), and include a thesis statement that
serves as a roadmap for the reader.
Comparison of Research Questions. Open the section with a
sentence that engages the reader and gives a peak into your
analysis. Please discuss the main ideas behind the research

8. questions, as well as the researcher’s approach to exploring
these questions. Did they use mixed methods, quantitative, or
qualitative methods? Mention the number of hypotheses
(quantitative) or research questions (qualitative), but do not list
the research questions. Remember to compare the approaches
and discuss similarities and differences.
Comparison of Literature Reviews. This section should analyze
the research the authors use to support their studies. Do not take
this section lightly. You want to point out the theory and/or
main research the author’s used to set up their study, and if
possible mention why. Did all the studies take the same
approach, such as using similar authors for support? Do they all
provide a comprehensive history of research? Or do they only
use more recent work (last 10 years)? Both approaches can be
good depending on focus of study. The actual number of
references is not that important, however it would be apropos to
compare the scope of the studies without the actual use of
numbers.
Comparison of Sample Populations. Provide the important facts,
but then analyze the sample populations. Please focus on
available demographics, such as gender, age, education, income,
etc…Also, analyze the size and response rate of the studies as
well as whether or not the populations are homogenous or
heterogeneous.
Comparison of Limitations. This is the area where your analysis
will shine. Please understand that all research has shortcomings.
Sometimes researchers will reveal some of these limitations, but
usually there are more present than shared. Please read the
articles and look for bias that is present in the studies.
Sometimes it is the researchers’ fault and other times it happens
because of the random population selected. If you read
something and there seems to be something missing… you are
probably right. This area requires you to think critically about
the articles. I recommend using sub-headings in this section.
Once you have provided a brief intro paragraph break down into
the following sub-headings: Researcher Identified Limitations

9. and Additional Limitations.
Comparison of Results. This section examines the researchers’
results and discusses whether or not the hypotheses were
supported or their objectives were fulfilled.
Conclusion and Recommendations for Future Research. The
conclusion section should refer back to the Introduction and
wrap up your paper. It is not a restatement of the authors’
conclusions – it is your conclusions based on your analysis. The
recommendations section should be rooted in the study and not
something too far outside the scope. I would begin by looking at
some of the limitations and generate your recommendations
from there.