English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

One way that policies get enacted in higher education is through educational research. In 2000 the National Association of Graduate-Professional Students conducted the National Doctoral Program Survey (NDPS) in an effort to learn more about doctoral students’ experiences and to influence doctoral education policy at both the local and national level. However, the National Doctoral Program Survey (NDPS) have only been reported in the aggregate. This aggregate reporting is appropriate if the items on the survey are measuring the same construct with the same level of accuracy across all respondents, but if this is not the case, then the veracity of the study results can be severely compromised. The purpose of this study was to examine the NDPS instrument using differential item functioning (DIF) analysis to determine if survey items functioned differently across gender and race/ethnicity. We identified 29 of the 48 items as displaying DIF, meaning women and students of color were either more likely or less likely to agree with their Caucasian male peers on certain items. Therefore, some caution may need to be exercised when interpreting the NAGPS data for diverse groups of students.

Differential Item Functional Analysis by Gender and Race of the National Doctoral Program Survey