Jesus is the Anchor of my soul

"He’s the Alpha, Omega; Honor, Praise His Holy Name x 2

Jesus, Messiah, Praise your Holy name

Jesus, Saviour, Praise your Holy name

Jesus is the author of my life;

Jesus is the perfector of my life;

Jesus is the Captain of my soul,

Jesus is the Anchor of my soul."

Words of a song by Dr. MacDonald Mweemba Chaava. Lawton OK 73501

In June of 2022, my wife traveled to Zambia to provide financial assistance to her sister's family. I composed the words and music of this lively worship song!

I longed for a song that glorified the Lord Jesus, one that sounded scripture-like, with a pleasant melody and heartfelt devotion. During this period, I also grew more aware of the necessity of mentioning His name whenever praising Him, as other individuals and deities are claiming to be the Lord and hence calling us to worship them. If we are not careful, we may find ourselves worshiping false gods. We need songs that mention Jesus by name. It took me three hours to compose on the keyboard and guitar. I used the piano to select notes I had never used in a song and the guitar to round off and finish the sound.

One becomes an institution who earns a Doctorate

When I informed my buddy JB that I had earned a Doctor of Health Administration degree, he exclaimed joyfully, "Now you are an institution!" 

Internalizing that expression took some time. I set down to conduct research on the "institution." I began my search for a solution to the question, "What is an institution?" Can a Doctor of Philosophy or comparable degree be considered an institution? The following text is derived from numerous pieces in the literature.

A Ph.D. or comparable qualification holder is an institution.

An institution is stable, respected, and persistent, and can manage the behavior of a group of people within a society. That includes training in leadership and other disciplines. It is governed by an integrated system of regulations that apply to both official and informal social connections. A Ph.D. is governed by a comprehensive set of rules and answers to the qualities inherent in an institution. Because the holder of a Ph.D. is a human being, he or she is in fact a primary institution. 

A Ph.D. is associated with a societal purpose that transcends personality and intentions, governing the laws that regulate behavior and serving as a foundation of social order. It expresses socially sanctioned and enforced behavioral expectations among human Networks. 

Family, religion, peer groups, economic systems, the legal system, the criminal system, language, education, the research community, and academia are all examples of institutions. A Ph.D. functions by socially shared rules that are typically written down and known by everyone in the community.

It is an inherent part of the culture within a defined discipline; for example, a Doctor of Health Administration is an institution whose scope covers health care and social services. A Ph.D. has rights, expectations, and duties as an institution. The Ph.D. operates on norms, beliefs, and organizational rules. A Ph.D. characteristically possesses persistence and continuity. Institutions are constraints that human behavior requires to govern them. 

I recognized JB's comment as accurate. The literature on this issue is readily available and relatively straightforward. 

What really goes on in a doctoral Residency? University of Phoenix experience.

The Doctoral Residency

During three days of DOC/720R, the doctoral student formally began developing the doctoral dissertation.  The doctoral residency was a time for students and faculty to get together for "classes" and "daily assignments." There was a strict schedule with a specific deliverable: a Precis. 

We left the hotel at 7 am and attended classes until about 5 pm, with coffee and lunch breaks between meals served. We got back to the hotel around 6 pm.

Preparation. 

There was a requirement to prepare for the residency by reading some textbook chapters and literature. One of the program documents stated that it was "crucial to complete the Précis Development Worksheet" based on what we learned in RES/709 to assist in preparing for residency. There was a worksheet containing crucial questions to assist in thinking through and developing the core aspects of a feasible and sound dissertation study. Each student was required to submit a completed precis development worksheet before starting the first day's class.

Professors and other college staff were on hand when we got into class. We occupied modern classrooms on the second or third floor assigned to us. We had time to interact over the worksheets, critiquing one another's work. Then there was a meeting for all of us. The professors made some presentations, and there was a great deal of interaction among the faculty as they came and went in and out of classrooms. 

As you went up and down the elevator, you met Year 1, Year 2, etc. You could tell who was in Year X by the color of their sticker. There was a great deal of interaction with facilitators (as they preferred to be called) and students. Some of them preferred to be called by their first names. I insisted on calling them what I wanted to be called when it is my turn.

I recall ... our cohort facilitator. She became our group's anchor (more accurately, standard-bearer). She told us all the essential elements that we needed to master. She offered numerous valuable tips to assist us in producing the dissertation, qualitative vs. quantitative research, academic writing, IRB and ethical issues, and perception vs. reality. I will remember her for her motto: simplify, simplify, simplify, and finish, finish, finish; and to focus, focus, focus! 

We all knew that you either passed or failed after the three-day session. After putting in more time and spending the entire night at my computer desk editing big portions of my precis, I earned a pass by what I consider a "miracle." I would never forget those days or the suggestions I received about the dissertation process partly because I could see the facilitator and her animation about it.

Looking back

First, as the day drew near for my first doctoral residency, I was sitting at home in Lawton, Oklahoma, asking all these questions: What is the doctoral residency all about? What good is it to me? 

As the day drew closer, I prepared myself, booked my hotel room, and serviced my vehicle for the 6-hour journey. 

Then, the day was finally here! Six hours later, full of excitement, I was checking into the hotel. Someone was already standing at a desk with the University of Phoenix flag, if I may call it that. I registered and received my name tag for display on my chest, and it said something like: MacDonald, Year 1. 

There was also a 'meet and greet' after dinner. I and others paused for portrait photos.

So, after dinner, dressed like a future doctor of health administrator, I took my place at a round table in a seat reserved just for me (my name was written there!) There were four other students with me, and soon, the chatter filled the room. Soon I am also getting to know my neighbor. I am taking in everything, watching for something I did not expect to happen. Then, after the formal meeting, I poured some coffee and helped myself to the salad buffet. I learned that starting the next morning, we all will be fully engaged with school.

So what did I learn from the first residency? 

There, I gained a true appreciation for the value of a dissertation and the characteristics of an excellent study. I also gained knowledge through critiquing the work of my classmates. Some of my friends were well ahead of me in their dissertation process, while others lagged behind. Meeting and speaking with faculty aided me in contextualizing my doctoral journey. I was on the lookout for new information that I was unfamiliar with. I acquired a couple items. Most of all, I benefited from seeing, hearing, and touching people with whom I identified as peers and seniors. RES/720R was three days.

Knowledge Without Boundaries (KWB) Summit 2021

Presenting a Literature Systematic Review: A Collaborative Team Project - A Report.

Dr. MacDonald Chaava as Team Leader 

I received an email from University Research Leadership on February 2, 2021, asking me to lead a team to research the ramifications of COVID19 for K-12 education in the virtual environment. It was entirely up to the team to decide what to make of the project. The original two member team focused on the topic of emotional intelligence using a quantitative study design. The original idea was to publish in a journal or to produce a document the University of Phoenix could use in education courses.

The two members of the original team, including me continued to the end of the project. Along the way, three new members joined the team. Each member brought new energy and a different skillset to the team. As new members joined the team, we decided to revisit the earlier parameters (quantitative study on emotional intelligence) and we welcomed the ideas of the new members to give the team direction.

We were invited to present at Knowledge Without Boundaries (KWB). One colleague suggested a workshop style output and another one suggested a team presentation for KWB. We adopted the team presentation of a systematic literature review.

The team benefited from regular consultations with University Research Leaders, who provided the general direction and infused positive energy for our team to keep moving forward.

Our regular weekly 45 minute meetings were set for Wednesday afternoons. Our first two meetings were conducted using Teams, however, it became evident that the group was more familiar with Zoom. After that we met using Zoom every week.

Team attendance was up and down. Two members consistently attended all meetings, arriving on time and remaining to the end. One member only attended 40% of meetings but also completed all written team assignments on time.

Email and Teams provided the means for regular communication. Members viewed Teams threads as complicated, finding it challenging to follow the threads and to find files stored in Teams.

Once the subject for the literature review was identified, the team researched the literature to find articles published during the COVID19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021. From the initial search, each member identified a theme of interest to focus on for the KWB presentation. All themes were relevant to the impact of the pandemic on the transition to teaching and learning in the virtual environment.

As the team leader, I encountered some personal challenges and leadership headwinds. Perhaps my style of leadership contributed to some headwinds. For example, I proposed to use a reference manager called Mendeley. Each member was asked to familiarize themselves with the program and then to join a share point on Mendeley to store and have access to the same references in one place. The suggestion was accepted by members but not everyone was able to get on board. As team leader this experience was frustrating, but I decided to overlook it at the time. On the whole, team cohesion was high.

Work and School, Side By Side

I pointed out in one of my earlier posts that school and work are like two sides of the same coin. At this point, I have a point to make about this. I was so excited when a topic came up at work with the title Motivational Interviewing. Dr. Ben (not his real name) presented on this subject over a period of one hour via Webex. We saw PowerPoint slides as he presented. The similarity between what I showed at the start of my blog and this topic of MI is indeed striking.

The heart of the matter is behavior change in the health care setting. How do you as health care providers promote behavior change necessary for compliance and best outcomes in the hospital setting? MI constructs all target behavior change. They include Intrinsic Motivation, Stages of Change, and Social Learning Theory.

According to the presenter, researchers noticed that in the American system healthcare providers were more confrontational when attending to patients; hoping that aggressive behavior would motivate clients to change their behavior. Evidence pointed in the opposite direction, indicating strongly, that motivational interviewing rather than confrontational approach facilitates behavior change. Alongside this evidence the overlay of theories for Intrinsic motivation and stages of change that people go through.

According to the presenter, not much research has gone into this subject especially as it relates to a group setting. How do you apply the concepts that have been studied in individuals to the group setting and organizational change? I see this spot as potential for exploration. In my opinion, and based on the experience of more than fifteen years in the HIV field, organizations and communities share many of the characteristics of individuals in these communities. Whether or not there is research in this area is something I will have to explore in the coming days. (Jan 13, 2016)

Questions and Pieces of Advice

My doctoral journey professor said something that is worthy thinking about and writing down on this blog. Noting the fear of statistics expressed by two students in my class, particularly one that was convinced statistics are impersonal, boring, hard to deal with, and so forth, the professor pointed out that this is a common complaint among students at residency.

The professor's guidance on the matter is to remain objective especially as marketers and dissertation researchers. She admits there are times when we "yawn at statistics"; however, she totally emphasizes the importance of objectivity in our work, saying, "We should NOT let our personal preferences influence how we approach a research problem."  This got me really interested.

She raised three questions and pieces of advice for us to consider:
(a) If you plan a qualitative study for your research and the reason you give for taking a qualitative method, saying for example, "I hate statistics!" and/or "because it is easier than a quantitative method", then, according to her, "you will have a very difficult time persuading people that your methodology is appropriate." By people, she is probably talking about the dissertation committee first and foremost.
(b) If you plan a quantitative study for your dissertation and your reasoning is, "Because my instructor (or dissertation chair) told me" and/or "Because it is easier than a qualitative method", the road ahead could be long, messy and painful.
(c) If you do not have 3 to 5 peer reviewed sources that call for research about your specific topic with your proposed method, then it is highly advised to find them.

She adds this thought, "If you cannot find adequate support in the literature for your proposed work, STOP, drop, and rethink your methodology.

`My Dilemma

One week later and I am still thinking; I am not sure which way to go with my dissertation ideas. I wish the answer was easy. I envy those who made up their minds earlier based on their current occupations. Today, I had a new idea which could help me make forward movement if it has any water in it, as they say.

I am thinking of doing a basic research, one that explores a new idea to be titled: Empowering Patients through Strategic Questioning.  This is the same, in my opinion, as saying give patients space to specify their expectations and provide feedback all along the way through the health care system. More specifically that means all health care providers, including the receptionists should be trainined to treat patients as special stakeholders in the system rather than as customers.

Many professionals have said this, but it is worthy saying again. The hospital is the one place where people generally hate to go; it is the one place where they may be forced to stay against their will; the patient expects hotel quality service, and above all, expects to pay little or nothing for services provided. In fact, the hospital can be a place of emotional, physical, and spiritual turmoil. Many people coming to the hospital are afraid of what might happen or what diagnosis may be made while in the hospital. All the years I practiced as a medical laboratory technologist I was aware of the dichotomy of health care ministry.

A lady came to the laboratory once wanting to know if she was pregnant. The urine test came out positive and I recall her words as she sat in the chair with a blank stare. '"Why?" In that moment, her life came to a standstill; she was totally transformed.  I also recall on so many occasions when a person's life was touched this way or that way by all manner of issues. Cancer, HIV, diabetes, high blood pressure, and other issues affecting the human body.

The last thing one wants to find in the hospital are workers who do not care; especially the reception desk that happens to be the face of the hospital. Tenderness and empathy should accompany all those working in the health care system. Doctors, nurses, technicians, pharmacist, and non professionals too. Whoever works in the health care system should be trained to deal with patients with a degree of sensitivity.

Having said that, it is easy to overlook the fact that workers in the hospital are almost always working under pressure. This is the dichotomy I refer to. To be able to care requires someone who also feels cared for. Nurses and doctors also need to be cared for. Oftentimes as a patient we may forget that health care workers have needs too. It is not hard to see this problem multiplying itself many times over in the system where one patient is not the last one, and where some patients have challenging characters.

What are your expectations?

This question can be applied in an empowering way. Health care providers should not provoke patients to fear; instead they should learn to de-escalate tensions and fears patients may have. Some fun, some humor, some empathy can come out of the initial contact.
By asking this question (What are your expectations?) of patients as they walk into the hospital, the provider can empower the patient to consider not only what he or she might get out of the system for themselves but also what they may contribute to the system.
I have noticed in some of the good clinics that at the reception desk they have a video playing showing diseases and how to go about diagnosing and treating them. This, in my opinion, was not empowering the patient; it reinforced fears that a person might have already. What do people really need when they come to the reception desk? I suspect many patients would say they want to be heard. They want to tell their stories.