Expanded Assessment Study Examining the Citation Patterns from Traditional and Nontraditional Institutions and Their Effect upon the Quality of Doctoral Dissertation Reference Lists

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study used citation analysis in conjunction with a subjective rubric with five validated criteria to assess the quality of a purposive sample of 452 education dissertation reference lists produced at a nontraditional institution from six doctoral programs. These programs used a variety of distance education models. The citations were then compared with the 100 reference lists selected from doctoral education programs at 10 traditional institutions. Criteria included the breadth of resources, depth of the literature review as shown through the citing of critical historical and theoretical works, depth as demonstrated through the scholarliness of citations chosen, currency, and relevancy. The study discusses how the expanded sample of traditional reference lists continued to demonstrate consistent patterns. In contrast, although the sample of reference lists from distance education programs was much expanded, the patterns of the subsets of reference lists at the nontraditional institution were significantly diverse. The patterns of 35 doctoral reference lists from another for-profit, nontraditional institution known for providing distance education were also examined to compare the results of the two nontraditional programs. Possible reasons for differences in citation patterns by traditional and nontraditional programs are discussed, and the possible role of distance education and program criteria are examined for insights they offer into the use of citation analysis as an assessment tool of the library research skills of doctoral students.