Student Experience of an Insider Action Research
Doctorate
The Students’ Experience of an Insider Action Research Doctorate
Wendy E. A. Ruona, Ph.D.
University of Georgia
Correspondence can be sent to: wruona@uga.edu
Anne Graham Cagney, Ph.D.
Trinity College
Working Paper
Track: Scholarly Practitioner Research and Teaching & Learning
1
Student Experience of an Insider Action Research
Doctorate
Abstract
Purpose:
Doctoral education and the idea of “doctorateness” is shifting in
response to increasing demands for relevance in addition to rigor
in society’s most highly educated. The professional practice
doctorate has emerged as an innovative and potentially powerful
design to integrate professional and academic knowledge and
develop Scholar-Practitioners. Yet evidence of whether these
doctoral experiences are effective is limited and we need
empirical research to more deeply understand the experience and
impact of these models.
Design/Methodology: An exploratory qualitative study of alumni of a U.S. professional
practice doctoral programme with signature pedagogy rooted in
action research and designed to develop Scholar-Leaders.
Findings from 6-10 qualitative interviews will be shared.
Findings:
Findings shed light on (a) the nature of learning and insider action
research, (b) the components of the ‘inner’ teaching-learning
environment of this professional-practice doctoral programme, (c)
programme impact on participants’ professional and leadership
development, and (d) the nature of ‘doctorateness’ for individuals
engaged in a professional practice doctorate.
Implications:
This (in process) study provides insight into the experience and
impact of a professional practice doctorate with signature
pedagogy rooted in action research and designed to develop
Scholar-Leaders. Findings from this study will inform designers
of doctoral programs. In addition, findings provide key insights
related to our understanding of insider action research, facilitating
for transformative learning, and the notion of scholarly-practice.
Keywords:
Doctorateness
Professional Practice Doctorate
Doctoral Education
Action Research
Scholar-Practitioners
Leadership Development
2
Student Experience of an Insider Action Research
Doctorate
3
The Students’ Experience of Insider Action Research Doctorates
Doctoral education is changing—in the need for research-based responses to the
grand challenges facing society as well as related to the employability of the doctoral
graduate. It is increasingly clear that participants in doctoral programmes must develop new
and different skills and perspectives; and programmes worldwide are responding with
innovative models of doctoral education (i.e. the professional practice doctorate) and are
embracing fundamentally different ideas of ‘doctorateness’ (Trafford & Leshem, 2002;
Trafford & Ruskin, 2009; Wellington, 2013). Yet, evidence that these “new” responses are
effective is limited and we need additional research to understand the experience and impact
of these models. This paper aims to address this gap by sharing the findings of a qualitative
study that explores the student experience of a professional practice doctorate that is rooted in
insider action research and is designed develop scholar-leaders.
Theoretical Framework
This study is grounded in a theoretical frame comprised of three areas of literature.
These are:
Action Research. A rich tradition of theory and practice originating from Lewin in the
late-1940’s distinguished by its dual purpose of taking action and generating knowledge
about that action as it unfolds (Reason & Bradbury, 2008). Particular emphasis on insider
action research (Coghlan, 2008; Coghlan & Brannick, 2014)
Transformative Learning. Transformative learning, framed by Jack Mezirow (2000),
adopts a cognitive/rational approach emphasising the critical role that experience and
reflection play on existing assumptions about the world in order to arrive at a new worldview.
He theorises about how adults interpret their life experience and defines learning as a
meaning making activity.
Student Experience of an Insider Action Research
Doctorate
Inner’ Teaching-Learning Environment. Entwistle (1987, 2003) suggests that
students’ perceptions of the teaching-learning environment (TLE) are strongly determined by
a set of overlapping contexts that comprise of four elements: course contexts; teaching and
assessing content; staff-student relationships; and aspects of the students and student culture
within a particular programme. The ‘inner’ TLE map acts as an organising framework when
considering how to enhance existing teaching-environments to encourage students to engage
more deeply with the subject matter and achieve a higher quality of learning.
Purpose & Design
This qualitative study explored the student experience and impact of a professional
practice doctorate that uses action research as its signature pedagogy and is designed to
develop Scholar-Leaders. Specific research questions were:
1. What is the experience of a professional practice doctorate that
uses action research as its signature pedagogy?
2. In what ways did the student’s perspective shift during and after
the doctoral program?
3. What is “doctorateness” in this program?
4. What facilitates and inhibits student’s journey in the professional
practice doctorate?
Research Design and Methods
The basic research design was qualitative inquiry. Semi-structured interviews
(Glesne, 2006) (1-2 hours long) have been conducted. To enhance the trustworthiness of the
study and triangulate the interviews, documents that provided insight into the focus of this
study were solicited as the participant felt comfortable. Individuals were also asked to review
their transcript and our interpretation of the interview and engage in a follow-up interview if
deeper inquiry was beneficial as a part of our member checking process.
4
Student Experience of an Insider Action Research
Doctorate
5
Program Description & Sample
The Program. This study1 focuses on the student experience of a professional
practice doctorate at a large public university in the Southeast of the United States. Aligned
with the notion of a signature pedagogy (Olson & Clark, 2009; Shulman, 2005), the program
is rooted in a sound conceptual framework (Figure 1) that aims to develop scholar-leaders—
emphasizing individuals’ capacity to lead change (Ruona & Watkins, 2014) and engage in
scholarly practice (Ruona & Gilley, 2009). Coursework, key milestones, and the dissertation
are designed with action research as an undergirding framework and to ensure the rigor
worthy of a doctoral degree combined with the innovation of a degree focused on advanced
practice and actionable knowledge (Argyris, 1996).
Figure one. Scholar-Leaders: Leading Change through Action Research
Sample. Participants were selected from the population of alumni of the Ed.D.
program. The findings that are reported in this paper focus only on phase one of the research
project based on 6-10 participants (data collection on-going).
Data Analysis
1
The context for this study was a research initiative begun within and between partner institutions in Ireland and
the USA the addresses the need for more research into creating professional development transformative
learning environments at the doctoral level. Funded in part by the Fulbright Commission, it focused on working
with significant American academics, well versed in the field of transformative learning and action research.
Student Experience of an Insider Action Research
Doctorate
The researchers are in the process of conducting rigorous data analysis and will
present emerging findings during the conference. Digital tapes of the interviews are being
fully transcribed. Consistent with qualitative methodology, the data is being analyzed by the
researchers with respect to the research questions using a mix of inductive coding and the
constant comparative method (Charmaz, 2014; Glaser & Strauss, 1967) and the modified
inductive Framework Approach (Smith & Firth, 2011). Analysis of themes within each
category will produce the findings that are presented, and each finding will be clearly
substantiated in data/evidence. Exemplar quotes from participants will be offered during the
presentation to evidence each theme.
Preliminary Results and Findings
This working paper points to emerging findings from the study thus far. The
researchers are continuing to analyze the data and will share findings during the conference
that are based on rigorous analysis to date. Emerging findings are tentatively organized
around the categories outlined in Table 1, which also provides some introduction to emerging
themes thus far.
Conclusions
The results of this study will provide deep insight into the nature of learning in this
kind of professional practice doctorate; the ‘doctorateness’ that can result; and the aspects of
the teaching-learning environment that need to be attended to in order to foster this kind of
learning experience and lay the groundwork for transformative learning. This is highly
relevant for educators of HRD professionals.
In addition, in light of the emphasis on action research in the professional practice
doctorate program explored in this study, readers will also gain knowledge related to action
research as a mechanism of transformative learning to inform management learning and
development (Coghlan & Graham Cagney, 2013; Lamm, 2000).
6
Student Experience of an Insider Action Research
Doctorate
7
Student Experience of an Insider Action Research
Doctorate
Table 1. Emerging Themes (organized by category)
Categories
Nature of learning in an insider
action research
project/dissertation



Components of the ‘inner’
teaching-learning environment
of this professional-practice
doctoral programme




Emerging Themes
Leading others and teams
Addressing challenges in complex organizational
systems
Navigating power and politics
What happens when components of the ‘inner’
teaching and learning environment are and are
not aligned and implications for doctorateness
and for programme design
Role of reflexivity (content, process, and
premise)
Critical role of student community/culture
Facilitating for transformational learning
Impact on participants’
professional and leadership
development

Shifts in perspective about self and others (and
connection to transformative leadership)
Nature of ‘doctorateness’ for
individuals engaged in a
professional practice doctorate

Shifting identity (Scholar-Leader—to be or not
to be?)
Moving beyond “credential” to new
responsibilities

8
Student Experience of an Insider Action Research
Doctorate
9
References
Argyris, C. (1996). Actionable knowledge: Design causality in the service of consequential
theory, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(4), 390-406.
Charmaz, Kathy. Constructing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Coghlan, D. (2008). Insider action research projects: Implications for practising managers.
Management Learning, 32(1), 49-60.
Coghlan, D. & Brannick, T. (2014) Doing action research in your own organization (4th ed.).
London: Sage.
Coghlan, D. and Graham Cagney, A. (2013). Multisensory holistic immersion: The method of
insider inquiry skills as a threshold concept. Journal of Learning Development in Higher
Education, 5, 2013.
Entwistle, N.J. (1987). A model of the teaching-learning process. In J.T. E. Richardson, M.W.
Eysenck & D. Warren Piper (Eds.), Student learning: Research in education and cognitive
psychology (pp. 13-28). London: S.R.H.E./Open University.
Entwistle, N. (2003). Concepts and conceptual frameworks underpinning the ETL project. OCC.
Report 3, Enhancing Teaching-Learning Environments in Undergraduate Courses Project,
Higher and Community Education. University of Edinburgh: School of Education.
Glesne, C. (2006). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (3rd Ed). New York:
Longman.
Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Lamm, S. L. (2000). The connection between Action Reflection LearningTM and transformative
learning: An awakening of human qualities in leadership (Unpublished dissertation).
Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA. [Cited in Watkins,
K., O’Neil, J.A., Marsick, V,J. & Ward, R. Transforming through Action Learning: An
Student Experience of an Insider Action Research
Doctorate
10
Analysis of Critical Incidents of Experienced Managers Learning. TLN Conference Paper.
New York, 2014]
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Olson, K. & Clark, C. M. (2009). Signature pedagogy in doctoral education: The leader–scholar
community, Educational Researcher, 38(3), 216–221.
Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (2008), The SAGE handbook of action research (2nd ed.). London:
Sage.
Ruona, W.E.A., & Watkins, K.E. (2014). A conceptual framework and signature pedagogy to
develop scholar practitioners and leaders of change. Roundtable presented at the 4th
International Conference on Professional Doctorates, Cardiff, Wales.
Ruona, W.E.A. & Gilley, J.W (2009). Types of practice: A guide for human resource
development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11(4), 438-453.
Schein, E.H. (1999). Process consultation revisited: Building the helping relationship. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52–59.
Smith, J. & Firth, J. (2011). Qualitative data analysis: The framework approach. Nurse
researcher 18(2), 52-62.
Stokols, D. (2006). Towards a science of transdisciplinary action research. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 38, 63-77.
Trafford, V. & Leshem, S. (2002). Anatomy of a doctoral viva. Journal of Graduate Education,
3, 33-41.
Trafford, V., & Ruskin, A. (2009). Doctorateness as a threshold concept. Innovations in
Education and Teaching International, 46(3), 305-316.
Wellington, J. (2013). Searching for 'doctorateness'. Studies in Higher Education, 38(10), 1790-1503.