Advertisement

The Potential of Communities of Learning for Dual Career PhD Programs – A Case Study

  • Martin RehmEmail author
  • Mindel van de Laar
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Business Education and Training book series (ABET, volume 6)

Abstract

Doctoral education has increased in popularity amongst working professionals, who are driven to update their knowledge and skills continuously. As a result, a new type of PhD fellow has emerged, with considerably different background characteristics than regular PhD fellows, for instance a higher average age and job tenure. While this development should have had a profound impact on the way in which doctoral education is facilitated, traditional (teaching) methodologies remain the dominant form of instruction. Communities of Learning (CoL) have been suggested as a new and more flexible way of facilitating PhD research that takes into account the characteristics of the new type of PhDs. This chapter provides empirical evidence from an actual CoL, which has been specifically designed, implemented and facilitated for the new type of PhDs at a Dutch university. Based on the presented findings and the authors’ experience with CoL for doctoral education, some practical implications will be discussed that can contribute to the success of similar initiatives elsewhere.

Keywords

Online Module Doctoral Education Focus Group Meeting Coordination Team Online Learning Community 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Alavi, M., Kayworth, T. R., & Leidner, D. E. (2005). An empirical examination of the influence of organizational culture on knowledge management practices. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(3), 191–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allan, B., & Lewis, D. (2006). The impact of membership of a virtual learning community on individual learning careers and professional identity. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(6), 841–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amin, A., & Roberts, J. (2006). Communities of practice: Varieties of situated learning’. EU Network of Excellence Dynamics of Institutions and Markets in Europe (DIME).Google Scholar
  4. Becher, T. (1994). The significance of disciplinary differences. Studies in Higher Education, 19(2), 151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernard, R. M., & Rojo de Rubalcava, B. (2000). Collaborative online distance learning: Issues for future practice and research. Distance Education, 21(2), 260–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Caffarella, R. S., & Barnett, B. G. (2000). Teaching doctoral students to become scholarly writers: The importance of giving and receiving critiques. Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 39–52. doi: 10.1080/030750700116000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chalmers, L., & Keown, P. (2006). Communities of practice and professional development. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 25(2), 139–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Costley, C., & Lester, S. (2012). Work-based doctorates: Professional extension at the highest levels. Studies in Higher Education, 37(3), 257–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cross, R., Borgatti, S. P., & Parker, A. (2001). Beyond answers: Dimensions of the advice network. Social Networks, 23(3), 215–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cumming, J. (2010). Doctoral enterprise: A holistic conception of evolving practices and arrangements. Studies in Higher Education, 35(1), 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. de Laat, M., & Lally, V. (2003). Complexity, theory and praxis: Researching collaborative learning and tutoring processes in a networked learning community. Instructional Science, 31(1–2), 7–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fowler, C. J. H., & Mayes, J. T. (1999). Learning relationships from theory to design. Association for Learning Technology Journal, 7(3), 6–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gannon-Leary, P., & Fontainha, E. (2007, September). Communities of practice and virtual learning communities: Benefits, barriers and success factors. eLearning Papers, p. 5.Google Scholar
  14. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gherardi, S., & Nicolini, D. (2000). The organizational learning of safety in communities of practice. Journal of Management Inquiry, 9(1), 7–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hopkins, P. E. (2007). Thinking critically and creatively about focus groups. Area, 39(4), 528–535. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4762.2007.00766.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hung, D. W. L., & Der-Thanq, C. (2001). Situated cognition, Vygotskian thought and learning from the communities of practice perspective: Implications for the design of web-based learning. Educational Media International, 38(1), 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Järvelä, S., Järvenoja, H., & Veermans, M. (2008). Understanding the dynamics of motivation in socially shared learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 47(2), 122–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lee, A., & Boud, D. (2003). Writing groups, change and academic identity: Research development as local practice. Studies in Higher Education, 28(2), 187–200. doi: 10.1080/0307507032000058109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lester, S. (2004). Conceptualizing the practitioner doctorate. Studies in Higher Education, 29(6), 757–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Loxley, A., & Seery, A. (2012). The role of the professional doctorate in Ireland from the student perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 37(1), 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Malfroy, J. (2005). Doctoral supervision, workplace research and changing pedagogic practices. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(2), 165–178. doi: 10.1080/07294360500062961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Martinovic, D., & Zhang, Z. (2012). Situating ICT in the teacher education program: Overcoming challenges, fulfilling expectations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(3), 461–469. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2011.12.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nachmias, R., Mioduser, D., Oren, A., & Ram, J. (2000). Web-supported emergent-collaboration in higher education courses. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 3(3), 94–104.Google Scholar
  26. Neumann, R. (2007). Policy and practice in doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education, 32(4), 459–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Dickinson, W. B., Leech, N. L., & Zoran, A. G. (2009). Toward more rigor in focus group research: A new framework for collecting and analyzing focus group data. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(3), 1–21.Google Scholar
  28. Pearson, M. (1999). The changing environment for doctoral education in Australia: Implications for quality management, improvement and innovation. Higher Education Research and Development, 18(3), 269–287. doi: 10.1080/0729436990180301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pearson, M. (2005). Framing research on doctoral education in Australia in a global context. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(2), 119–134. doi: 10.1080/07294360500062870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pearson, M., Evans, T., & Macauley, P. (2004). The working life of doctoral students: Challenges for research education and training. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(3), 347–353. doi: 10.1080/0158037042000265917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Procter, R. N., Williams, R., & Stewart, J. (2010) If you build it, will they come? How researchers perceive and use web 2.0. London, UK: Research Network Information.Google Scholar
  32. Rehm, M. (2009). Unified in learning – Separated by space: Case study on a global learning programme. Industry and Higher Education, 23(4), 331–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rehm, M. (2013). Unified yet separated – Empirical study on the impact of hierarchical positions within communities of learning. Maastricht: Uitgeverij Boekenplan.Google Scholar
  34. Rehm, M., Giesbers, B., & Rienties, B. (2009). Comparing communities of learning for incoming bachelor students & working professionals. In N. Brouwer, B. Giesbers, B. Rienties, & L. Van Gastel (Eds.), Student mobility and ICT: Dimensions of transition (pp. 143–150). Amsterdam: FEBA ERD Press.Google Scholar
  35. Rehm, M., Galazka, A., Gijselaers, W., & Segers, M. (2012). Managing communities of learning for working professionals: The impact and role of facilitators. Paper presented at the EDiNEB 2012, Haarlem, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  36. Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D., Waterval, D., Rehm, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2006). Remedial online teaching on a summer course. Industry and Higher Education, 20(5), 327–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Roblyer, M. D., & Wiencke, W. R. (2003). Design and use of a rubric to assess and encourage interactive qualities in distance courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 17(2), 77–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Romsdahl, R. J., & Hill, M. J. (2012). Applying the learning community model to graduate education: Linking research and teaching between core courses. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(6), 722–734. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2012.678325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Smith, C., & Bath, D. (2006). The role of the learning community in the development of discipline knowledge and generic graduate outcomes. Higher Education, 51(2), 259–286. doi: 10.2307/29734977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Soares, D. D. (2008). Understanding class blogs as a tool for language development. Language Teaching Research, 12(4), 517–533. doi: 10.1177/1362168808097165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stacey, E., Smith, P. J., & Barty, K. (2004). Adult learners in the workplace: Online learning and communities of practice. Distance Education, 25(1), 107–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice. Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Zembylas, M., & Vrasidas, C. (2007). Listening for silence in text-based, online encounters. Distance Education, 28(1), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Educational Media & Knowledge ManagementUniversitat Duisburg EssenDuisburgGermany
  2. 2.Maastricht Graduate School of GovernanceMaastricht University/UNU-MERITMaastrichtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations