General PhD Info | For Prospective PhD Students | For Current PhD Students
Information on Doctoral Study for Current Students
Initial Faculty Advising
Upon entrance to the graduate program, each student is assigned a temporary advisor to facilitate the student’s progress through the program. Initial assignment or choice of a temporary advisor in no way obligates the student to select the temporary advisor as his/her program advisor or to include the temporary advisor as his/her dissertation (PhD) committee member. Likewise, the temporary advisor has no obligation to serve on his/her dissertation committee. The system of temporary advisors is merely a way of identifying a specific faculty member the student can call upon for advice. The temporary advisor can be changed at any time, by mutual consent.
In order to maintain a close working relationship between the students and the faculty, students are required to undertake self-assessment activities every semester. After completing a written self-assessment, students meet with the EDEP faculty at the end of each semester to review and direct progress toward their degrees.
Students who have successfully defended their dissertation proposal are not required to attend these meetings.
Procedure for Completing the PhD Degree
Each student works closely with members of the graduate faculty to define an individual program of study. A typical program spans three to five years of concentrated study within the broadly defined discipline of educational psychology.
Program requirements include (a) completion of required 
core courses; (b) completion of required interdisciplinary specialization; (c) college teaching experience (EdEP 711) in conjunction with one or more faculty members; (d) documentation of directed research experiences; and (e) a minimum residency of three semester of full-time work or the equivalent in credits at UHM.
Advancement to Candidacy: Completion of Core Courses
Students must receive a grade of at least “B” in all core courses. The purposes of the core courses are (a) to determine whether to encourage students to proceed in the PhD program; (b) to develop an appropriate plan for study; and (c) to advance to candidacy. Students may submit Student Progress Form I upon completion of core courses.
PhD Guidelines
Please see PhD Guidelines for specific information regarding (1) substitution of core courses, (2) interdisciplinary specialization, (3) college teaching, and (4) comprehensive examination.
Dissertation Prospectus and Proposal
Completion of the core coursework marks the beginning of greater concentration in developing expertise in the area of the student’s interest. The development of a dissertation prospectus is done in conjunction with the identification of the Dissertation Committee Chair. The prospectus is a 5-10 page description (exclusive of references) of the proposed dissertation that is developed in consultation with a prospective Chair and submitted to the faculty. The prospectus must be submitted by the 15th of each month in order to be considered at the first faculty meeting of the following month. If there are no major objections to this prospectus from the graduate faculty as a whole, the student forms a doctoral committee based on mutual interest. Dissertation committee formation generally is intertwined with proposal development. A formal oral defense of the proposal is made by the student to the doctoral committee in order to confirm approval of the proposed research.
Comprehensive Examination
The comprehensive exam is taken after the proposal defense. Committee members typically formulate two or three questions that may be related to the student's proposal but may be broader in scope. Students have up to three weeks or more to provide written answers typically from 20-35 pages. When students pass the comprehensive exam, Student Progress Form II will be submitted to the Graduate Division.
Completion of the Program
It is the responsibility of the student to keep all members of the dissertation committee informed of the scope, plan, and progress of the dissertation research. After consultation with the Dissertation Chair, copies of the completed dissertation must be submitted to the committee members at least two weeks prior to the date of the final oral examination by the committee. Upon successful defense of the dissertation and subsequent completion of revisions, Student Progress Form III is submitted to the Graduate Division.
Copies of the completed dissertation must be submitted to committee members at least two weeks prior to the date of the final oral examination. Two unbound, clean copies must be deposited with the Graduate Division by the deadline specified in the "Calendar." Original signatures are required on the signature page. Bound copies must also be provided to the Department and to the Dissertation Chair.
Sample Titles of Recent Dissertations
Ah Sam, A. (2005). Proportional Representation and Student Perceptions of a Campus Climate for Diversity.
Asada, K. (2007). Searching for Best Practices in Reading Instruction: A Multiple Case Study of a State Hospital Adult Literacy Program for Psychiatric Inpatients.
Barnard, B. (2004). The Effects of a High School Intervention Program on Student Alienation, and Dropping Out of School with Implications for Adolescents of Native Hawaiian Ancestry.
Ceppi, A. (2000). Examining a Model of community-based secondary education: A Hawaiian studies program in Hawaii.
Coffee, A. (2004). The Influence of Personal and Environmental Factors on Teacher Preparation for Intervention in Student Altercations.
Higa, T. A. (2005). A Study Through a Vygotskian Perspective of a Hybrid model of Participatory Evaluation and School-Based Evaluation.
Inaba, H. (2001). An Examination of the Effects of Independent and Interdependent Self-Construals on the Development of Critical Thinking Dispositions: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis.
Lau-Smith, J. (2001). Examining Family-School Partnerships: A Case Study of Parents Perceptions of Parental Involvement in a Hawaiia Language Immersion Middle School.
Linke, L. (2007). The Architecture of Moral Decision Making and the Influence of Social Relatedness.
McFarlane, E. (2006). The Influence of Parenting in Early Childhood on Children's Social and Cognitive Development and Transition to School.
Peecook, E. (2000). Secondary School Students Perceptions of Available Learning Opportunities at Home and at School and Effects on Content Meaningfulness and Academic Achievement.
Ratliffe, K. (1999). Perceptions of Special Education on Molokai.
Reiss, P. (2005). Causal Models of Item Format- and Gender-Related Differences in Performance on a Large-Scale Mathematics Assessment for Grade 3 to Grade 10.
Schonleber, N. (2006). Culturally Congruent Education and the Montessori model: Perspectives from Hawaiian Culture-Based Educators.
Takanishi, S. (2005). A Multi-level Analysis Estimating Schools' Likelihood of Meeting NCLB Academic Targets: A Comparison of Two Models of Effectiveness.
Tasaki, K. (2001). Culture and Epistemology: An Investigation of Different Patterns in Epistemological Beliefs Across Cultures.
Tibbetts, K. (2004). When the Test Fails: The Invalidity of Assumptions of Normative Stability with Extreme Populations.
Uyeno, R. (2004). Validity Study of Hawaii State Assessment 8th & 10th Grade Reading Tests.
Woodruff, R. (2006). Possible Selves and Motivation in At-Risk College Students.
Wyatt, T. (2007). National School Reform in Greenland: Cultural Compatibility & an Externally Developed Model of Effective Schooling.