An Online Doctorate for Researching Professionals

Program Design, Implementation, and Evaluation

Swapna Kumar, Kara Dawson

• Publisher: AU Press
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781771992091
• Topic: Didattica
• Subtopic: Didattica inclusiva

The interest in and demand for online terminal degress across disciplines by professionals wishing to conduct research and fulfill doctoral degree requirements at a distance is only increasing. But what these programs look like, how they are implemented, and how they might be evaluated are the questions that challenge administrators and pedagogues alike. This book presents a model for a doctoral program that bridges theory, research, and practice and is offered completely or largely online. In their described program model, Kumar and Dawson enable researching professionals to build an online communtiy of inquiry, engage in critical discourse within and across disciplines, learn from and with experts and peers, and generate new knowledge.Their program design is grounded in the theoretical and research foundations of online, adult, and doctoral education, curriculum design and community-building, implementation and evaluation. The authors, who draw on their experience of implementing a similar program at the University of Florida, not only share data collected from students and faculty members but also reflect on lessons learned working on the program in diverse educational contexts. An important guide for program leaders who wish to develop and sustain an online professional doctorate, An Online Doctorate for Researching Professionals will also be a valuable resource for higher education professionals seeking to include e-learning components in existing on-campus doctoral programs.

PART I

Theoretical Foundations and Design

1 The Case for an Online Professional Doctorate

The goal of most doctoral programs is to prepare students for research and teaching positions that will allow them to advance knowledge in their chosen disciplines. Ideally, students immerse themselves in the scholarship of their disciplines, acquire research skills, become active members of the academic community, complete comprehensive or qualifying exams, and conduct independent research that culminates in a dissertation. However, not all individuals who pursue a doctoral degree do so with the hope of working in a university- or research-based setting. Some are motivated to pursue doctoral degrees by the increasingly large and complex body of knowledge and expertise required in their field, aspirations for promotion or advancement, and/or an intense passion to make a difference in their local professional contexts. Traditional doctoral structures are often less than ideal for such individuals because their needs and goals differ from those associated with traditional academic and research environments.

The needs of professionals seeking terminal degrees that are not focused on academic or traditional research environments have been addressed in a variety of ways. The past decade has seen an increasing number of professional doctorates offered in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, countries where higher education professionals and policy-makers have given greater attention to economic pressures, the need to implement research in the professions, and the drive to prepare a highly educated workforce (Kot & Hendel, 2012). In Canada, similar political, economic, and social factors have contributed to a renewed emphasis on the quality of PhD programs and to the creation of flexible PhD programs for adult professionals (Allen, Smyth, & Wahlstrom, 2002). These efforts address the rising need for highly skilled researchers and professionals outside of academia, aim for closer connections between research and practice or between research in academic and nonacademic professional contexts, and provide improved access to a terminal degree for adult professionals with commitments that might exclude them from full-time on-campus studies.

Developments in Internet and communication technologies in the last two decades have made possible virtual learning environments that facilitate doctoral-level experiences at a distance. However, the diversity of models for online doctorates, the research expectations and products, and the traditional view of what constitutes doctoral education have often led to such degrees being perceived as less rigorous, lower quality, and incapable of advancing knowledge. Nevertheless, excellent online doctoral programs (both professional doctorates and flexible PhDs) exist around the world that contribute to knowledge creation and that graduate professionals who conduct invaluable research in their professional contexts.

In this opening chapter, we provide some background about professional doctorates and present our model for an online professional doctorate that fuses theory, research, and practice. Using the example of the online professional doctorate in educational technology at the University of Florida (UF EdD EdTech), we explain why the online environment is an ideal medium in which to offer a professional doctorate. The chapter concludes with a list of key considerations for university program leaders wishing to distinguish between research and professional doctorates and to offer online professional doctorates.

A HISTORY OF THE PROFESSIONAL DOCTORATE IN THE UNITED STATES

The first doctor of pedagogy (later called doctor of education) was awarded in 1898 at the University of Toronto in Canada, and the first doctor of education, or EdD, in the United States was awarded in 1921 at Harvard University, sixty years after the first PhD was granted at Yale University (Allen et al., 2002; Lee, Brennan, & Green, 2009). Doctoral degrees in other disciplines, such as nursing, engineering science, and psychology, soon followed, the goal being to enable disciplines that could not offer a doctor of philosophy to award a degree comparable to the PhD. A report on doctorates earned in the United States in 1991 listed fifty different doctoral-level degrees in addition to the PhD, including several in very specialized fields such as rehabilitation and music ministry (Ries & Thurgood, 1993). These doctoral degrees varied in purpose and scope: some were research doctorates designed, like the PhD, to prepare recipients to teach at a postsecondary level, while others targeted people who planned to become practitioners in a particular discipline. Taking as his example the doctor of ministry, Tucker (2006) notes that, depending on the individual program, the same degree could amount to either a research doctorate or a professional doctorate.

This lack of standardization has been especially prevalent in relation to the EdD. The Survey of Earned Doctorates, sponsored by six federal agencies, reported that 143 participating doctor of education programs in the United States, after being reviewed over several years, were reclassified from research doctorate to professional doctorate during the 2010–11 period (National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, 2015). Given the close relationship between practice and research in the field of education, the EdD was, in theory, intended to prepare educational practitioners to be educational leaders who conduct research in practice, whereas a PhD in education prepared students for academic careers in educational research. In reality, however, several institutions, including Harvard, offered EdDs that looked more like PhDs, while others offered both degrees. The EdD was often treated as a less rigorous degree, with some institutions offering the EdD as a practitioner degree with no research component. As a result, “instead of being valued for accomplishing the discrete ends it was originally designed for, the EdD is widely regarded as a ‘Ph.D.-Lite’” (Shulman et al., 2006, p. 27). In 2006, on the basis of data collected from individuals involved in six different disciplines at fifteen institutions who had reconceptualized their doctoral programs, the Carnegie Initiative on the Doctorate emphasized the importance of clearly distinguishing between the research doctorate, which would prepare stewards of a discipline, and a professional practice doctorate, which would prepare stewards of practice (Perry & Imig, 2008; Shulman et al., 2006). Bourner et al. (2001) made a similar distinction between research and professional doctorates in universities in England using the terms discipline-development doctorates, whose holders seek to advance science and knowledge from a disciplinary standpoint, and student-development or context-improvement doctorates, whose holders seek to solve contextually based problems of practice through rigorous research.

Since 2007, to improve both programs, the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) in the United States has addressed the lack of clarity in the content of EdD and PhD programs by engaging colleges and universities in distinguishing the goals and outcomes of these two programs. According to the current CPED definition, PhD programs prepare researchers for traditional faculty or research settings while EdD programs “prepares educators for the application of appropriate and specific practices, the generation of new knowledge, and for the stewardship of the profession” (http://www.cpedinitiative.org/page/AboutUs). During our program’s inception, our faculty participated in CPED, and the vision of a professional practice doctorate equally rigorous to a Phd but distinct in purpose catalyzed our initial thinking about the UF EdD EdTech. Our model evolved based on numerous factors, including the online nature of our program, the interdisciplinary nature of the field of educational technology, the range of contexts within which our students work, and our familiarity with international perspectives on professional doctorates.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROFESSIONAL DOCTORATE

The term professional doctorate does not have a standard definition and is often synonymously used in various disciplines with terms such as practitioner doctorate, professional practice doctorate, the practice degree, and the clinical doctorate. All of these terms clearly refer to a doctorate designed for those with significant work experience and those who are embedded in or want to apply the degree to practice. However, doctoral programs in different disciplines, as well as within the same discipline across institutions, have varying expectations and formats.

The problem with terminology is further complicated by the fact that internationally, the professional doctorate takes many forms in the English-speaking world. In various disciplines in the United States, a combination of coursework and research has been prevalent in doctoral education of all types since the 1920s. Similarly, in Canada, doctoral programs generally include coursework, a residency (with varying lengths and requirements for research versus professional doctorates), and research (Allen et. al., 2002). In the United Kingdom and Australia, however, the PhD often does not include a “taught component” (Bourner et al., 2001, p. 66). The United Kingdom first offered professional doctorates (e.g., the EdD) in the 1990s; these degrees often included coursework, which distinguished them from research doctorates. In Australia, the professional doctorate has been defined as “a program of research and advanced study which enables the candidate to make a significant contribution to knowledge and practice in their professional context” and possibly “more generally to scholarship within a discipline or field of study” (Council of Australian Deans and Directors of Graduate Studies, 2007, p. 1).

British and Australian researchers often refer to the professional doctorate as an “in-service doctorate” (as opposed to the “pre-service” or research doctorate) to indicate that the doctorate was designed for working professionals and not for young students fresh from bachelor’s or master’s degrees (Bourner et al., 2001, p. 66). For instance, Maxwell and Shanahan (1997) define the professional doctorate in Australia as “an in-service or professional development award, concerned with production of knowledge in the professions,” distinguishing it from “the professional doctorate in the USA (with its history as a pre-service award)” (p. 133). In addition, Maxwell (2003) found that the connection to industry was definitive of several professional doctorates, which were characterized by the location of their research in industry, the inclusion of committee members from industry, or mentoring by members in industry. The workplace, and not the university, as the basis for research was also highlighted by Maxwell and Shanahan (1997) in their analysis of nineteen EdD programs in Australia; they asserted that professional doctorates produced “knowledge in context” rather than “propositional knowledge” (p. 142).

This distinction is noted by Gibbons, Limoges, Nowotny, Schwartzman, Scott, & Trow (1994), who propose that two modes of knowledge production exist: Mode 1, or disciplinary knowledge, which is generated in universities and is “governed by academic interests of specific communities,” and Mode 2, or transdisciplinary knowledge, which is produced “in context of application” and is a result of “new forms of research practice carried out in places far from the university” (cited in Lee, Green, and Brennan, 2000, p. 124). Or, as Morley and Priest (1998) describe it, transdisciplinary knowledge contributes to the “development of professional practice, rather than to the advancement of purely theoretical knowledge” (p. 24). Based on the distinction between these two modes of knowledge production, Lee et al. (2000) propose a hybrid curriculum model for the professional doctorate that takes into account the intersections between the university and the organization in which a doctoral research project will typically be undertaken. This hybrid model would facilitate the development of not only new kinds of knowledge but also new ways of producing knowledge, ways that involve new relationships among participants and new kinds of research writing. Lee et al. (2000) propose “a three-way model, where the university, the candidate’s profession and the particular work-site of the research meet in specific and local ways, in the context of a specific organization” and where the doctoral student will use “research literacies” to solve “problems of professional practice” (p. 127). Our proposed definition of the professional doctorate substantially corresponds to this point of view.

THE ONLINE PROFESSIONAL DOCTORATE FOR RESEARCHING PROFESSIONALS

Following their review of doctoral programs at seventy British universities, Bourner et al. (2001) distinguished between the PhD as a degree “intended to develop professional researchers” and the professional doctorate as a degree “designed to develop researching professionals” (p. 71). We agree with this distinction and define researching professionals as individuals who conduct research that generates knowledge to improve (primarily) their professional contexts; their research combines foundational and theoretical knowledge in their disciplines (sometimes, in more than one discipline) with knowledge of research in their contexts. We contend, however, that a professional doctoral curriculum that is designed according to our model can also contribute to the advancement of theoretical and empirical knowledge within a discipline or across disciplines. We propose an online professional doctorate that

• combines online coursework with a dissertation;
• allows researching professionals to remain embedded in their professional contexts while engaging with an online academic community of inquiry;
• fosters scholarly thinking in researching professionals;
• produces research grounded in a conceptual framework and culminating in a dissertation that addresses problems of practice but also has implications for other contexts; and
• generates researching professionals who can fuse theory, research, and practice and can communicate new knowledge and research in both professional and academic contexts.

An online professional doctorate with these characteristics contributes to effective application of research in professional contexts, productive collaborations between experts in professional and academic contexts, and a deeper understanding of research in professional contexts for those working in traditional academic contexts. This bidirectional flow of knowledge, expertise, and research can result in the advancement of various types of knowledge in both academic and professional contexts.

THEORY, RESEARCH, AND PRACTICE

Our model is based on the premise that the knowledge, research, and scholarship of students graduating with a professional doctorate should bring together the trifecta of theory, research, and practice (see figure 1).

Figure 1. Trifecta of theory, research, and practice.

• Theory. Researching professionals should possess foundational knowledge of theories in their discipline, and deep knowledge of theories that inform their areas of specialization within their discipline.
• Research. Researching professionals should possess foundational skills in research methods, deep knowledge of prior research and research methods in their areas of specialization, and knowledge of ethical behaviour and appropriate research methods in the context of their practice.
• Practice. Researching professionals should possess foundational knowledge of the social, political, historical, and economic fabric of their professional contexts; deep specialized knowledge of their professional contexts and disciplines; and a passion for improving their professional contexts through problem solving.

Researching professionals in a professional doctorate should be able to (a) construct their conceptual or theoretical frameworks that combine theories and prior research from one or more disciplines as they relate to problems of practice; (b) apply those theoretical frameworks using contextually appropriate research skills, to the implementation of research in their professional contexts; and (c) communicate the results and implications of their research to enhance context-specific knowledge and practice. In our model for the online professional doctorate, researching professionals are also enculturated into scholarly thinking in their disciplines, making it possible for them to disseminate knowledge and research produced in their professional contexts to other contexts. For example, in the UF EdD EdTech, dissertations produced by students within their professional contexts often lead to implications for other professional contexts and can sometimes contribute to the advancement of knowledge in a discipline. We assert that knowledge and research resulting from a true fusion of theory, research, and practice in an online professional doctorate are significant for both professional and academic contexts. Moreover, the online nature of the professional doctorate we describe in this book and the multiple opportunities for interactions and information dissemination provided by communication technologies today ensure the blurring of context boundaries and increased engagement among stakeholders from various contexts.

THE NEED FOR ONLINE PROFESSIONAL DOCTORATES

Several institutions currently offer successful on-campus professional doctorates in which students take classes at university campuses in the evenings or on weekends and conduct research in their workplaces. Nevertheless, we assert that the online environment is an ideal medium for professionals who wish to immerse themselves in theory and conduct research while remaining embedded in their practice. We envision the online professional doctorate as particularly relevant for researching professionals who work in diverse professional contexts at a distance from the institution at which the terminal degree of their choice is offered. With today’s Internet and communication technologies, faculty members at a university can interact using real-time video and audio with people situated at physical distances; professionals can access academic research and course materials while at their workplaces and homes or while travelling; and online communities can comprise participants located in different states, countries, and workplaces. It is not only possible but, in our opinion, preferable for a professional doctorate that combines theory, research, and practice to be offered using the online medium.

Those likely to apply to professional doctorates are typically older than traditional PhD students, are usually fully employed in professional settings, and often carry numerous personal responsibilities such as caring for children or aging parents. Online education allows such professionals to continue to work, whether full-time or part-time, and to meet the personal demands on their time while simultaneously learning in an environment that promotes the integration of university learning and professional practice. During interviews with nineteen students who graduated from the first two cohorts of the UF EdD EdTech, seventeen stated that they could not have received their doctoral degrees if not for the online medium. The reasons they provided included family responsibilities, work commitments, inability to coordinate class schedules with professional commitments, and geographical distance from a research university. Sixteen students stated that the support of their online cohorts was instrumental in their ability to persist and finish their dissertations. The online environment enables students to build a community with other students working in other professional contexts, thus avoiding the isolation that many working doctoral students feel in traditional, campus-based programs.

In our educational technology program, we do not see the PhD and EdD degrees as mutually exclusive but as having different purposes, goals, and outcomes: the PhD prepares professional researchers for academic and other contexts and the EdD prepares researching professionals for the interdisciplinary field of educational technology. With these distinctions in mind, we spent considerable thought and effort on the admissions process, attempting to identify the goals of prospective students. Of the 117 applicants to our first two cohorts (approximately 50% of the applications received) who completed a voluntary, anonymous survey about the reasons for their application to our university, 115 were employed full-time. About 90 percent of those who responded to the survey stated that they were applying to our program because it was offered online, and 60 percent named convenience as a reason. Professional development (82%), professional growth (76%), and enhanced professional status (61%) were the most cited reasons for pursuing a doctoral degree. These data clearly indicate the relevance of an online terminal degree to working adults who cannot attend a university full-time but would like to learn and grow in the context of their professions. Of the 117 survey respondents, only 11 percent had not previously taken an online course, whereas 51 percent had taken at least six courses online before applying to our program. While we acknowledge the fact that the respondents were interested in or were already working in ...