Jean and Kent research

1. Barriers by type

1.1. 1

1.1.1. Source 1

1.1.1.1. May not take care of self

1.1.1.2. might procrastinate due to worry about getting it right

1.1.1.3. seeks to avoid mistakes

1.1.1.4. overly self-reliant

1.1.1.4.1. may not seek help

1.1.1.5. self-critical

1.1.1.5.1. perfectionistic

1.1.1.6. overly detailed

1.1.1.6.1. may not be able to summarize clearly enough

1.1.1.7. bothered by unjust criticism

1.1.1.7.1. could be derailed by criticism

1.1.2. source 2

1.1.2.1. pushed to make everything perfect

1.1.2.1.1. may have trouble writing without editing at the same time, making it a slow process

1.1.2.2. needs to have all details under control

1.1.2.3. Can be judgmental

1.1.2.4. May tend to overplan

1.1.2.4.1. and perhaps not be able to handle unavoidable glitches in the process

1.1.2.5. May need to learn to ask for help

1.1.2.6. initial reaction to criticism may look like resistance

1.1.3. source 3

1.1.3.1. may be frustrated when others don't live up to the 1's standards.

1.1.3.1.1. could get frustrated with mentor or committee

1.1.3.1.2. May be uncompromising and rigid, rather than looking to accommodate mentor requests

1.1.3.2. May do too much

1.1.3.2.1. may become exhausted or over extended

1.2. 2

1.2.1. Source 1

1.2.1.1. needs to be needed

1.2.1.1.1. may loose site of own needs

1.2.1.1.2. may have trouble setting boundaries

1.2.1.1.3. May feel guilty when paying attention to own needs

1.2.1.2. Needs to be appreciated

1.2.1.2.1. May be affected if doesn't receive attention and appreciation from mentor and other faculty members

1.2.1.3. Invests heavily in relationships

1.2.1.3.1. may be derailed if a key relationship goes "south"

1.2.1.4. May have difficulty accepting help from others

1.2.2. source 2

1.2.2.1. practice self-care

1.2.2.1.1. meet own needs

1.2.2.2. may depend on the reaction of others for self-esteem

1.2.2.2.1. could be derailed by criticism of important other

1.2.2.3. May overuse superlatives in communication

1.2.2.3.1. great

1.2.2.3.2. terrific

1.2.2.4. may take on too much (not saying not to the needs of others

1.2.2.4.1. may not have time left for dissertation

1.2.2.4.2. may over-schedule self

1.2.2.5. May have difficulty separating feelings about people from facts

1.2.2.5.1. could get in the way of objective analysis of qualitative data

1.2.2.6. May lack courage of convictions

1.2.2.6.1. may give in to mentor or committee when he or she should not

1.2.3. source 3

1.2.3.1. may be a people pleaser

1.2.3.2. needs to rescue others

1.2.3.2.1. could move toward rescuing the study participants

1.2.3.2.2. or may get too involved in participants' lives

1.2.3.2.3. has trouble accepting help for self

1.2.3.3. Although the 3 may have trouble expressing needs, may be seen as needy by others

1.2.3.3.1. could frustrate mentor

1.3. 3

1.3.1. source 1

1.3.1.1. may want to finish too quickly (driven by achievement)

1.3.1.1.1. may skimp on the details

1.3.1.2. May be frustrated by slow responses

1.3.1.3. avoids losing face

1.3.1.3.1. criticism may hurt self-esteem in a way that student abandons the project

1.3.1.4. Avoids whatever may distract from achievements

1.3.1.4.1. may avoid key process details (IRB details, for example)

1.3.1.5. communication tends to be efficient

1.3.1.5.1. may be too parsimonious in writing, explaining too little and assuming too much is understood.

1.3.1.6. May take on too much

1.3.1.6.1. overload

1.3.1.6.2. or may rush jobs

1.3.1.7. frustrated by others' incompetence

1.3.1.7.1. mentor will need to be on top of things.

1.3.2. source 2

1.3.2.1. may continuously drive to make things happen

1.3.2.1.1. may become frustrated by the slow waiting parts of the dissertation process

1.3.2.2. may tend to over-compete

1.3.2.3. may dislike inefficiency

1.3.2.3.1. might spend insufficient time on analysis of the data

1.3.2.3.2. May expect things to go perfectly, rather than planning for contingencies

1.3.2.4. May need to appear successful

1.3.2.4.1. Might report more progress to mentor than is actually happening, meaning mentor doesn't spot problems early enough to intervene.

1.3.3. source 3

1.3.3.1. Driven to achieve

1.3.3.2. May tend to name drop

1.3.3.3. May take shortcuts to get to the goal

1.3.3.3.1. May take shortcuts in the dissertation process

1.3.3.3.2. May sacrifice quality for speed

1.3.3.4. May abandon goals if not assured of success

1.3.3.4.1. may quit if sees too many barriers.

1.3.3.5. May tend to self-promote

1.4. 4

1.4.1. source 1

1.4.1.1. has trouble focusing on the present

1.4.1.1.1. may get lost in dreams of the future

1.4.1.2. Emotional roller coaster

1.4.1.2.1. may become paralyzed by worry and anxiety

1.4.1.2.2. may fall into inaction

1.4.1.3. avoids mundane

1.4.1.3.1. may avoid the little details of the dissertation process

1.4.1.4. can be self-absorbed

1.4.1.5. Envies others

1.4.1.5.1. may be tripped up by believing other students are making more progress

1.4.1.6. May be angry if committee member or mentor has to leave

1.4.1.7. resists changing self, for fear of losing individuality

1.4.1.7.1. may get in the way of becoming a researcher

1.4.1.8. may become discouraged by slow progress

1.4.2. source 2

1.4.2.1. may tend to compare self to others

1.4.2.1.1. Could be fooled by impressions of how fellow students are progressing, and either be discouraged or feel as if it is okay to coast

1.4.2.2. may have trouble appreciating the contributions of others

1.4.2.2.1. may get in the way of collaboration (with participants or with research sites, for example)

1.4.2.3. tends to self-reference

1.4.2.3.1. may have difficulty avoiding first person in writing

1.4.2.3.2. may have difficulty asking questions of participants without volunteering researcher's perspective

1.4.2.4. communications may tend to be overly wordy and complex

1.4.2.4.1. may have trouble condensing thoughts into coherent logical arguments

1.4.2.5. may tend to project feelings onto others

1.4.2.5.1. could get in the way of objective analysis of qualitative data

1.4.3. source 3

1.4.3.1. may feel that others have it easy

1.4.3.1.1. may get caught up in comparing self to other students, and give up if feels less effective as student

1.4.3.2. takes every slight personally

1.4.3.2.1. may react badly to feedback

1.4.3.2.2. has trouble moving forward when feeling bad about self

1.4.3.3. may have trouble developing and implementing strategy

1.4.3.3.1. could apply to dissertation completion strategy

1.5. 5

1.5.1. source 1

1.5.1.1. loves to accumulate knowledge

1.5.1.1.1. may never stop reviewing the literature

1.5.1.1.2. may never feel he or she knows enough to move on to the next step

1.5.1.2. tends to retract into self

1.5.1.2.1. very private

1.5.1.3. can become depleted

1.5.1.3.1. may run out of energy to persist

1.5.1.4. communication can be terse

1.5.1.4.1. may have trouble writing enough

1.5.1.5. hates being dependent

1.5.1.5.1. may have trouble relying on mentor or other committee members

1.5.1.6. May be excessively anaytical

1.5.1.6.1. may not be a problem with a quantitative study, but what about qualitatitve?

1.5.2. Source 2

1.5.2.1. reluctant to share self with others

1.5.2.1.1. may have difficulty writing a reflexive section in qualitative dissertation

1.5.2.2. may tend to withdraw

1.5.2.2.1. may find it difficult to recruit study participants

1.5.2.2.2. may prefer remote means of interacting with study participants, and asynchronous means, which may limit the depth of data uncovered.

1.5.2.3. may stay in planning/strategizing too long

1.5.2.3.1. may find it difficult to start writing or researching

1.5.3. source 3

1.5.3.1. tends to be self-sufficient

1.5.3.2. may be too conceptual, avoiding direct participation

1.5.3.2.1. May have trouble with qualitative data gathering

1.5.3.2.2. may get lost in ideas, and not get down to researching and writing

1.5.3.3. may avoid feeling obligated to anyone

1.5.3.3.1. may not ask for help when it is needed.

1.5.3.4. may offer too much information

1.5.3.4.1. may write too much, without articulating the bigger picture

1.5.3.5. May be paralyzed if doesn't feel 100% competent

1.5.3.5.1. may get stuck, feeling incapable of being perfect researcher or writer

1.6. 6

1.6.1. source 1

1.6.1.1. magnifies negatives

1.6.1.1.1. may see natural setbacks as disasters

1.6.1.2. may not contradict authority

1.6.1.2.1. may be unable to disagree with mentor when disagreement is needed

1.6.1.3. may be pessimistic

1.6.1.3.1. may be overwhelmed by pessimism

1.6.1.4. may not trust authority

1.6.1.4.1. may assume the worst motivations behind mentor and faculty behaviors

1.6.1.5. may be frustrated or angry by mentor who seems unreliable

1.6.1.5.1. may let anger get in the way of a productive relationship with mentor

1.6.1.6. frustrated by unresponsiveness

1.6.1.6.1. May over-react to perceived slow feedback on drafts

1.6.2. Source 2

1.6.2.1. may confuse imagination with insight

1.6.2.1.1. may reach conclusions that are not clearly supported by the data

1.6.2.2. may look to others for authority

1.6.2.2.1. may not trust self in the solitary endeavor of dissertating

1.6.2.3. may see the world as half full

1.6.2.3.1. may focus too much on what's wrong with the dissertation or the dissertation process, losing momentum

1.6.2.4. May get stuck focusing on different courses of action to take, losing sight of the goal

1.6.2.4.1. may not have a clear vision of the desired outcome (doctorhood) and may not persist without it

1.6.2.5. may feel undeserving

1.6.2.5.1. may not feel topic of dissertation contributes anything, and may abandon it because of that

1.6.2.6. may express self-doubt and worry

1.6.2.6.1. could lose credibility with mentor, committee, or faculty

1.6.2.7. may be paralyzed by anxiety

1.6.2.7.1. and simply stop working on the dissertation

1.6.3. source 3

1.6.3.1. may need others to provide safety and assurance

1.6.3.1.1. may over depend on mentor

1.6.3.2. may tend to challenge authority, act as devil's advocate

1.6.3.2.1. may over-challenge mentor

1.6.3.3. May suffer from analysis paralysis

1.7. 7

1.7.1. source 1

1.7.1.1. loves shiny things

1.7.1.1.1. may be easily distracted when the dissertation becomes a slog

1.7.1.2. does not like constraints

1.7.1.2.1. may chafe at detailed requirements

1.7.1.3. tends to be high level thinker

1.7.1.3.1. may tend to gloss over details

1.7.1.4. may overcommit

1.7.1.4.1. and do a poor job on everything

1.7.1.5. takes criticism personally

1.7.1.5.1. may not be able to accept and integrate improvement suggestions

1.7.2. source 2

1.7.2.1. may be easily distracted

1.7.2.1.1. may find it hard to stay focused on dissertation work

1.7.2.2. may prefer pleasure over pain and effort

1.7.2.2.1. might postpone work on the dissertation in favor of having fun

1.7.2.3. may not listen well to others

1.7.2.3.1. could impact on ability to interview participants in a qualitative study

1.7.2.4. may chafe at authority

1.7.2.4.1. could lead to problems with mentor and with other faculty members

1.7.2.5. may act without thinking it through

1.7.2.5.1. consequences

1.7.2.5.2. who had power and influence

1.7.2.5.3. may not have the resources required to complete the dissertation project

1.7.2.6. may tend to multitask too much

1.7.2.6.1. reducing effectiveness on the dissertation project

1.7.2.7. may not appreciate details and quality

1.7.2.7.1. may deliver a poor quality dissertation

1.7.2.7.2. may not go deep enough

1.7.2.7.3. may assume saturation (qualitative) before really achieving it

1.7.2.7.4. may take shortcuts on data analysis

1.7.3. source 3

1.7.3.1. May chase after the new shiny thing, rather than bringing old stuff to a close

1.7.3.1.1. could be distracted by new research directions

1.7.3.1.2. May not fully digest data analysis - may not have the persistence to really understand the data and the meaning of data

1.7.3.1.3. may have trouble focusing on an achievable topic and research question

1.7.3.1.4. May not follow through on details.

1.7.3.2. May not dig deep enough

1.7.3.2.1. literature review may be skimpy

1.8. 8

1.8.1. source 1

1.8.1.1. tends to act first, think later

1.8.1.1.1. may jump into data collection before completely thinking through the process

1.8.1.2. may come across as confrotational

1.8.1.2.1. may affect relationship with mentor and other faculty members

1.8.1.3. may not like being controlled

1.8.1.3.1. may find the process itself to be too controlling

1.8.2. source 2

1.8.2.1. may not share vulnerabilities with mentor or others

1.8.2.1.1. could make it harder for experts to help with those areas of weakness

1.8.2.2. may not be able to relinquish control

1.8.2.2.1. may have trouble with those parts of the dissertation process that are out of the student's control (reviews and feedback, IRB, and others0

1.8.2.3. May act too fast

1.8.2.3.1. may not take the time to deeply understand the data

1.8.2.3.2. may also decide too fast

1.8.2.4. May blame others when hitches occur

1.8.2.4.1. could get in the way of completion if student doesn't realize that he or she owns sole responsibility for getting the thing done.

1.8.2.5. May plan at too high a level

1.8.2.5.1. and miss the operational details required for the methodology chapter.

1.8.3. source 3

1.8.3.1. may have a high need for control

1.8.3.1.1. might chafe under direction of mentor

1.8.3.2. may ask for forgiveness rather than for permission

1.8.3.2.1. could jump the gun before IRB and committee approval of proposal

1.8.3.3. May be quick to anger

1.8.3.3.1. might alienate mentor or committee is anger flares unexpectedly

1.8.3.4. may barge in like a bull in a china shop

1.8.3.4.1. could have trouble with sites and participants

1.8.3.5. may be impatient with details

1.8.3.5.1. may chafe at minutia of dissertation requirements

1.9. 9

1.9.1. source 1

1.9.1.1. tends to focus on the priorities of others

1.9.1.1.1. may run out of energy to do his or her own work on the dissertation

1.9.1.2. wants to please others

1.9.1.2.1. might blow in the wind, revising exactly as each reviewer asks

1.9.1.3. tends to avoid uncomfortable tasks

1.9.1.3.1. may do comforting things, rather than what the dissertation needs now.

1.9.1.4. dislikes conflict

1.9.1.4.1. may not stand up to mentor or committee members when that confrontation would help move the dissertation forward.

1.9.1.5. may avoid competing demands on time and energy

1.9.1.5.1. if dissertation is not a top priority (perhaps for a significant other), may let it slide

1.9.1.6. may have trouble setting priorities and deadlines

1.9.1.6.1. may fritter away the time

1.9.1.7. may feel that he or she does not deserve success

1.9.1.7.1. may self-sabotage

1.9.2. source 2

1.9.2.1. may have trouble expressing own thoughts and needs

1.9.2.1.1. dissertation could become the mentor's dissertation

1.9.2.2. may feel and act de-energized and passive

1.9.2.2.1. may not be as resilient as needed in the face of setbacks

1.9.2.3. may have difficulty setting priorities and keeping them

1.9.2.3.1. may not get done what needs to be done when it needs to be done

1.9.2.3.2. may have difficulty planning the work of the dissertation

1.9.2.3.3. may procrastinate

1.9.2.4. may have difficulty taking a position

1.9.2.4.1. may not be able to write a compelling chapter 5

1.9.2.5. may over-explain

1.9.2.5.1. making the dissertation longer than it should be

1.9.2.5.2. causing difficulty during oral defense

1.9.2.6. may collect too much data

1.9.2.6.1. leading to confusion about which data are relevant to the dissertation and what they mean.

1.9.2.7. may not be direct enough when asking help

1.9.2.7.1. may not get the help needed

1.9.3. source 3

1.9.3.1. may neglect tasks that are about self development and growth

1.9.3.2. May get lost in daydreams about a doctoral future

1.9.3.2.1. and not take action on the dissertation

1.9.3.3. may be indecisive

1.9.3.3.1. might not make the many small decisions that are part of the dissertation journey

2. Enneagram sources used

2.1. 1

2.1.1. Daniels, D., & Price, V. (2009). The Essential Enneagram: The Definitive Personality Test and Self-Discovery Guide. New York, NY: HarperCollins

2.2. 2

2.2.1. Lapid-Bogda, G. (2011). The Enneagram Development Guide. Santa Monica, CA: The Enneagram in Business Press

2.3. 3

2.3.1. Appel, W. (2011). Insideout Enneagram: The Game-Changing Guide for Leaders. San Rafael, CA: Palma Publishing

3. methods thought

3.1. Q-sort a list of barriers

3.1.1. most important

3.1.2. as in the Bachkirova study

4. tasks pre 11/19 meeting

4.1. Compile a list of barriers from my books on enneagram

4.1.1. hypotheses based on enneagram type

4.2. Look in my books on Ph.D. process

4.3. talk with McCaslin about his research

4.4. literature search

4.4.1. doctoral process

4.4.2. persistence

4.4.3. "personality AND Ph.D."

4.4.4. "personality AND dissertation"

4.4.5. Articles saved to the Jean and Kent file in Scholarship

4.5. contact Nancy Bostain re helping

4.5.1. and what statistical test to use

5. Target conference

5.1. Association for the Study of Higher Education

5.2. 11/14-16/19

5.3. Portland, OR

6. New tack - GSAEC proposal

6.1. Due 2/4

6.2. Ideas

6.2.1. Growing mindfulness in coaches

6.2.1.1. 1. Jean's work on mindfulness in counselors

6.2.1.2. 1.5 My work with executive coaches

6.2.1.3. 2. lit on mindfulness in coaches

6.2.1.4. 3. proposed combination of ideas.

6.2.1.5. sources

6.2.1.5.1. Jean's dissertation

6.2.1.5.2. My dissertation

6.2.1.5.3. mindfulness book by Silsbee

6.2.1.5.4. journal articles

6.2.2. intersection of coaching and counseling

6.2.2.1. Venn diagram