Project-Based Learning and Doctoral Student Research Skill Development: A Case Study

Authors

  • Nancy Fichtman Dana University of Florida
  • James Rigney SUNY Plattsburgh
  • Vicki Vescio University of Florida
  • Vera Wei Ma University of Florida

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2021.148

Keywords:

project-based learning, action research, practitioner research, doctoral education

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to understand the ways doctoral students in an online Ed.D. program developed their skills as practitioner researchers through a project-based learning (PBL) experience. In order to describe and analyze the nature of the students’ PBL experiences, case study methodology was used. Interviews, a video-recording of a two-hour synchronous class session, and student generated artifacts were iteratively analyzed by a team of researchers. Results reveal underlying tensions within three case themes: individual versus collective learning, simulated versus real research experience, and public class activity versus private group conversations. These findings demonstrate that Ed.D. program area faculty must balance the competing tensions raised by these case themes in order to facilitate research skill development and foster the ability of their students to grow as practitioner scholars.

Author Biographies

Nancy Fichtman Dana, University of Florida

Professor

School of Teaching and Learning, College of Education

James Rigney, SUNY Plattsburgh

PhD Candidate

School of Teaching and Learning, College of Education

Vicki Vescio, University of Florida

Clinical Assistant Professor

School of Teaching and Learning, College of Education

Vera Wei Ma, University of Florida

PhD Candidate

School of Teaching and Learning, College of Education

References

Adams, A., Bondy, E., Ross, D., Dana, N. F., & Kennedy-Lewis, B. (2014). Implementing an online professional practice doctoral program in a PhD environment: Managing the dilemmas. Journal of School Public Relations, 35(3), 363-382.

Arslan-Ari, I., Ari, F., Grant, M. M., & Morris, W. S. (2018). Action research experiences for scholarly practitioners in an online education doctorate program: Design, reality, and lessons learned. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 62(5), 441-449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0308-3

Barnett, B. G., & Muth, R. (2008). Using action-research strategies and cohort structures to ensure research competence for practitioner-scholar leaders. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 3(1), 1-42.

Buss, R. R. (2018). Using action research as a signature pedagogy to develop EdD students’ inquiry as practice abilities. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.5195/IE.2018.46

Buss, R. R., & Avery, A. (2017). Research becomes you: Cultivating EdD students’ identities as educational leaders and researchers and a “learning by doing” meta-study. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 12(3), 273-301. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775116674463

Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED). (2019). The CPED framework. https://www.cpedinitiative.org/the-framework

Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED). (2014). Development of the CPED working principles. https://www.cpedinitiative.org/page/HistoryPrinciples

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (Fourth edition). SAGE.

Dana, N. F., Adams, A., Bondy, E. Kennedy, B., Lowery, R., Swain, C., Pringle, R., & Ross, D. (2011, April). The development of practitioner scholars as teacher professional development: Exploring the problems and possibilities inherent in building an online professional practice doctoral program. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Dana, N. F., & Yendol-Hoppey, D. (2020). The reflective educator's guide to classroom research: Learning to teach and teaching to learn through practitioner inquiry (4th edition). Corwin.

David, J. L. (2008). What research says about... Project-based learning. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 80-82.

Firestone, W. A., Perry, J. A., Leland, A. S., & McKeon, R. T. (2019). Teaching Research and Data Use in the Education Doctorate. Journal of Research on Leadership Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775119872231

Guthrie, J.W. (2009). The case for a modern doctor of education degree (Ed.D.): Multipurpose education doctorates no longer appropriate. Peabody Journal of Education, 84(1), 3-8.

Hooks, B. (2013). Writing beyond race: Living theory and practice. Routledge.

Hung, C.-M., Hwang, G.-J., & Huang, I. (2012). A project-based digital storytelling approach for improving students’ learning motivation, problem-solving competence and learning achievement. Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 368-379.

Kerrigan, M. R., & Hayes, K. M. (2016). EdD students’ self-efficacy and interest in conducting research. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, 147-162.

Kumar, S., & Dawson, K. (2018). An online doctorate for researching professionals: Program design, implementation, and evaluation. Athabasca University Press.

Lambie, G. W., Hayes, B. G., Griffith, C., Limberg, D., & Mullen, P. R. (2014). An exploratory investigation of the research self-efficacy, interest in research, and research knowledge of Ph.D. in education students. Innovative Higher Education, 39(2), 139-153.

Leech, N. (2012). Educating knowledgeable and skilled researchers in doctoral programs in schools of education: A new model. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 019-037. https://doi.org/10.28945/1558

Leech, N., & Haug, C. A. (2015). Investigating graduate level research and statistics courses in schools of education. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10, 093-110. https://doi.org/10.28945/2111

Lovitts, B. E. (2005). Being a good course‐taker is not enough: A theoretical perspective on the transition to independent research. Studies in Higher Education, 30(2), 137-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500043093

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2010). Designing qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage Publications.

McClintock, C. (2004). The scholar-practitioner model. Encyclopedia of distributed learning, 393-396.

Moore, E. Jr., Penick-Paris, M.W., Michael, A. (Eds.). (2015). Everyday white people confront racial and social injustice: 15 stories. Stylus Publishing, LLC.

Neumann, R. (2005). Doctoral differences: Professional doctorates and PhDs compared. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27(2), 173-188.

Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

Pilkington, R. M. (2009). Practitioner research in education: The critical perspectives of doctoral students. Studies in the Education of Adults, 41(2), 154-174. https://doi.org/10.1080/02660830.2009.11661579

Perry, J. A. (2013). Introduction: Developing stewards of practice. In Perry, J. A. & Carlson, D. L. (Eds), In their own words: A journey to the stewardship of the practice in education (pp. 1-14). Information Age Publishing.

Perry, J. A., & Imig, D. G. (2008). A stewardship of practice in education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 40(6), 42-49.

Saldana, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

Sensoy, Ö., & DiAngelo, R. J. (2012). Is everyone really equal? An introduction to key concepts in social justice education. Teachers College Press.

Sensoy, Ö., & DiAngelo, R. J. (2017). Is everyone really equal?: An introduction to key concepts in social justice education (Second; J. A. Banks, Ed.). Teachers College Press.

Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52-59. https://doi.org/10.1162/0011526054622015

Shulman, L., Golde, C.M., Bueschel, A.C. & Garabedian, K.J. (2006). Reclaiming education’s doctorates: A critique and a proposal. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 25-32.

Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2008). Editorial: Envisioning the future stewards of the social-behavioral research enterprise. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(4), 291-295. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689808322946

Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. Autodesk Foundation.

Vaughan, M., Boerum, C., & Whitehead, L. S. (2019). Action research in doctoral coursework: Perceptions of independent research experiences. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 13(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2019.130106

Wetzel, K., & Ewbank, A. (2013). Conceptualizing the innovation: Factors influencing doctoral candidates’ interventions in the action research dissertation. Educational Action Research, 21(3), 392-411. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2013.813402

Zambo, D. (2011). Action research as signature pedagogy in an education doctorate program: The reality and hope. Innovative Higher Education, 36(4), 261-271.

Downloads

Published

2021-10-19

How to Cite

Dana, N. F., Rigney, J., Vescio, V., & Ma, V. W. (2021). Project-Based Learning and Doctoral Student Research Skill Development: A Case Study. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 6(4), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2021.148

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 4 (2021)

Section

Research Manuscripts

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.