jump to navigation

Archive for February, 2011

Loving the DP

Saturday, February 26th, 2011

After receiving comments/suggestions from my dissertation chair and two committee members, and making the necessary changes, I turned in my DP to my chair this afternoon. Today, I put in about 8 hours of work – polishing, adding, deleting, re-arranging, etc. I like the finished product.

We have a “Best Practices” document that I used side by side with my DP. I am hoping that I caught all the things I needed to! I am in week 6 of DIS9322B, which is the halfway mark. Wouldn’t it be WONDERFUL if I could have an approved DP in this course, and start collecting data pretty soon? I am worried a little about data collection, and sometimes I wake up at night and think, “What if NOBODY responds to my survey?” (I wonder if that has ever happened?).

It’s Saturday night and I can’t begin to count the number of Saturday nights that I have worked late on my schoolwork. Not just Saturdays but all the other nights, too! So I am a little punch-drunk because my brain is fried! Now on to bed to dream about OAR approval!

Reducing MS Word documents (with images) file sizes

Saturday, February 19th, 2011

My chair recommended that I follow these instructions to reduce the file size of my DP, which contains several images (charts, etc.). My DP saved as a .rtf was 12,516 KB. Using these instructions, my DP is now 2,418 KB when saved as a .rtf. When saved as a .docx, it is even smaller – it is now 342 KB. Dr. M said to send the DP as a .docx in the future.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/224663

Even after working in MS Word for many years, I never knew about this registry change!

I also received the first review of my DP by one of my committee members. Here is my plan: once I receive reviews back from BOTH committee members, I will incorporate their requests and modify the DP. Then, I will resend the final product to Dr. M. He may have some additional edits at that point. Once he is satisified, the DP will go to OAR review.

This committee member, Dr. W, only made some writing suggestions, such as clarifying some points and adding a few transitions. She made no major modifications to my proposal, or my research method! Wow! I am VERY EXCITED about this development. After reading, researching, and writing, I was afraid that I had become too myopic and was not clear enough, or overly complex. You will remember that I struggled with the Research Method section.

I don’t want to be overconfident because I am waiting for committee member #2 to weigh in, but I am lets say…hopeful…that I am moving forward…perhaps I see a glimmer of a light at the end of the tunnel???

Fiddler on the Roof

Sunday, February 13th, 2011

Yesterday, Husband and I watched Fiddler on the Roof on TV. I have seen the movie lots of times, but everytime I see it, the memories of when as a teenager I saw it on Broadway flood over me. Zero Mostel played Tevye on stage and the production was simply fantastic. I will never forget my first Broadway experience.

Watching the movie, I was reminded that the Fiddler is a symbol of survival even when life is difficult. Tevye says, “A fiddler on the roof. Sounds crazy, no? But here, in our little village of Anatevka, you might say every one of us is a fiddler on the roof trying to scratch out a pleasant, simple tune without breaking his neck. It isn’t easy. You may ask ‘Why do we stay up there if it’s so dangerous?’ Well, we stay because Anatevka is our home. And how do we keep our balance? That I can tell you in one word: tradition!”

And so we all must scratch out “our tune” as well – that is, without “breaking our neck”!!

DP to Dissertation Committee – 1st go-around

Saturday, February 12th, 2011

Dr. M and I corresponded back and forth several times and I made some changes in my DP. He now has it again, and after he proofs it, will send it to the Dissertation Committee for their comments and recommendations. I have two DC members.

The OAR comment on the CP involved investigating the feasibility of stratified random sampling, instead of simple random sampling. Stratified random sampling involves dividing the population into two homogeneous subgroups and then taking a random sample from each (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Instead of pre-separating into two groups, the surveys will self-separate the data into two groups as there will be a question asking if the firm publishes sustainability reports or not.

I can use stratified random sampling in the selection of firms, though. In an October 2010 download, there were 2,253 companies representing 128 industries on the NYSE (the population). I can use stratified random sampling as I make sure that each of the 128 industries has at least one company invited to the survey.

A reader asked me recently how many pages my current CP has in it. I am up to 139 pages at this point. I have six Appendixes, four tables, and three figures. I have 10 pages of references. I could probably write twice as much on my topic – but I am trying be economical with words!!