2   Designing the Curriculum

Since the advent of the Internet, distance education has been known by terms such as Web-based learning, computer-assisted learning, e-learning, virtual learning, and online learning. All of these terms presume both a spatial distance between the learner and the teacher and the need for sound instructional design that allows the teacher to communicate what the learners need. Emphasizing the importance of the transaction between the teacher and the learner, Moore (1993) defines distance education as “the universe of teacher-learner relationships that exist when learners and instructors are separated by space and/or by time” (p. 22). He argues that thoughtful and effective pedagogy can bridge the transactional distance between the teacher and the learner, making spatial difference irrelevant. For the sake of simplicity, we use the term online education in this book to refer to the general phenomenon and the terms online program, online courses, or online learning to refer to the process and its components. Online learning can be defined as “the use of the Internet to access learning materials; to interact with the content, instructor, and other learners; and to obtain support during the learning process, in order to acquire knowledge, to construct personal meaning, and to grow from the learning experience” (Ally, 2008, p. 17).

To what extent students use the Internet as a medium for interactions during a professional doctorate is in large part an institutional decision. Several institutions of higher education offer programs that are completely online and do not require any on-campus experiences. Others, like the professional doctorate at the University of Florida that forms the basis for our experiences and research, are offered largely online with required on-campus sessions of varying duration. Some institutions have attempted to use a blended model, enabling students to videoconference into live doctoral classes and seminars and thus take classes with on-campus doctoral students (Henriksen, Mishra, Greenhow, Cain, & Roseth, 2014). In this book, we describe the design, implementation, and evaluation of a program that is offered almost completely online, and we refer to it as an online program; however, the content of this book is equally applicable to those attempting to combine online learning with on-campus experiences for professional doctoral students because the theory, models, and examples apply to either configuration.

The rapid development of Internet and communication technologies in the past two decades has led to an increased number of institutions offering courses and degrees completely online and acknowledging online education as a component of their institutional strategies (Allen & Seaman, 2013). In addition to affording learners flexibility in terms of place, time zone, and access, online education enables them to interact with knowledgeable others, whether peers, instructors, or experts. However, learners’ interactions with learning materials, peers, and experts, if they are to be effective, must be carefully designed, taking into account educational learning theories, prior research, and learner needs. In the case of online professional doctorates in which (a) the learners are professionals with diverse backgrounds, experience, and working environments and (b) the learning goal is to develop research competence and scholarly thinking so that professionals can apply theory and research to practice, learning experiences must be designed with the needs, prior experiences, and professional contexts of these learners in mind.

In our model, we propose that theory, research, and practice be integrated at all stages of the online professional doctorate, with researching professionals constructing conceptual or theoretical frameworks, using contextually appropriate research skills, and communicating the implications of their findings in order to further context-specific knowledge. This chapter provides an overview of theories and research that can inform the conceptualization of curriculum that achieves the above in an online professional doctorate. We begin with a brief introduction to adult learning theory, transformative learning theory, and situated learning, and we discuss the implications of these theories for designing learning experiences for students in professional doctorates. Drawing from these theories, we then illustrate ways to connect theory, research, and practice to form the foundation for professional doctorates, using examples from the curriculum of the EdD in educational technology at the University of Florida (UF EdD EdTech).

LEARNING THEORIES AND PROFESSIONAL DOCTORATE CURRICULUM

Online graduate programs are traditionally about access and equity for nontraditional populations, although they also provide on-campus students with additional course options. Professional doctorates attract professionals of varying ages and years of work experience, making it necessary to understand how adults learn in order to design effective learning experiences for them. In many cases, professional doctorates attempt to connect theory and practice; facilitate the implementation of research in practice; and facilitate change in practitioners’ professional approaches, behaviours, and actions. Knowles’s (1980) adult learning theory of andragogy, Mezirow’s (1990) transformative learning theory, and Lave and Wenger’s (1991) work on situated learning provide, in combination, a robust framework for the design of learning experiences for adults.

Andragogy

Knowles (1973) argues that teaching adult learners requires additional strategies to those commonly used in pedagogy, which he asserts is essentially grounded in the art and science of teaching children. To this effect, he developed the model of andragogy, which includes four “crucial assumptions” (Knowles, 1980, p. 45): (a) adults are self-directed, (b) their prior experiences play a role in their learning, (c) their readiness to learn depends on the relevance of content, and (d) immediacy of application and performance-centredness influence their motivation to learn. Knowles (1984) later added two assumptions to this model: (e) internal motivation characterizes adult learning, and (f) the need to know, or the value of what is taught, is important for adults.

These six assumptions suggest a learning environment where adults are participants in decisions about what they will learn based on their needs and goals and on how they understand the gap between their current state of knowledge and where they want to be. The role of the teacher and teaching environment in this model is to facilitate learning that will help students meet and assess their progress toward their educational goals. Knowles’s (1980) description of the role of the instructor as a catalyst and guide—a “procedural technician, resource person, and coinquirer” (p. 49)—is particularly relevant to the roles of adviser and mentor in a doctoral program. Professionals who pursue higher academic degrees usually have professional goals and/or personal fulfillment in mind. The instructional design of a professional doctorate must consider these interests, scaffold the formulation of goals that are relevant to the professional and aligned with the doctorate, and foster a “process of self-evaluation” and “rediagnosis of learning needs” (Knowles, 1980, p. 49) throughout the student’s movement through the program. Knowles (1980) goes so far as to suggest that “the most appropriate starting point for every learning experience is the problems and concerns that the adults have on their minds as they enter” (p. 54).

In this regard, identifying problems of practice in their work environment during the first semester of a doctoral program, as we do in the UF EdD EdTech, provides a relevant foundation for the students’ research throughout a professional doctorate. Drawing on their professional experience helps students to stay engaged and self-directed, and identifying a problem clarifies their need for knowledge that will resolve the problem. They are thus motivated to explore theory and prior research and to conduct research related to the problem, since they are able to immediately apply what they learn to their work. Based on the knowledge they gain and apply, they may identify new problems of practice as they move through the professional doctorate. Using a problem of practice as a starting point in their studies ensures that exploration and application of theory and research have a self-directed purpose for professionals and improves their professional practice.

Transformative Learning Theory

Transformative learning theory is based on the idea of perspective transformation, which is defined by Mezirow (1990) as “the process of becoming critically aware of how and why our presuppositions have come to constrain the way we perceive, understand, and feel about our world; of reformulating these assumptions to permit a more inclusive, discriminating, permeable, and integrative perspective; and of making decisions or otherwise acting on these new understandings” (p. 14). This process, according to Mezirow, is triggered by a disorienting dilemma that is followed by self-examination and critical reflection. He categorizes three types of reflection that contribute to perspective transformation: reflection on the content learned, on the process of learning or unlearning, and on the premises held by learners. Along with critical reflection or self-reflection on assumptions, critical discourse is essential for exposing learners to new and disorienting information (Mezirow, 2006). The reflection phase is followed by the learner making new plans of action, building self-confidence, and eventually reaching a comfort level with new roles and ways of thinking (Mezirow, 1998). In the case of online professional doctorates, professionals often enroll because they want to acquire new knowledge or ways of thinking, although some may enroll because they need the additional qualification. When confronted with information that contradicts previous knowledge or beliefs, some professionals may become defensive and cling to old ways of thinking or acting, but the purposeful design of educational experiences that include reflection and discourse can facilitate changes in their perspectives—that is, in their beliefs, attitudes, and behaviour (Mezirow, 1998).

A common example of transformative learning in the UF EdD EdTech involves the way students’ thinking about technology adoption and use change over time. Most students enroll in programs about educational technology because they support the use of technology in learning. Most assume that their job is to propagate and facilitate technology adoption and use within their contexts. However, during the program, they are exposed to critical readings about the role of technology in learning, the unintended consequences of technology use, and pro-innovation bias. Gradually, students become more critical about technology adoption and use in their contexts and seek research support for initiatives they lead (Kumar & Dawson, 2014). A student in the UF EdD EdTech elaborated on this during a focus group discussion:

Usually, we don’t rely on research much at all. It’s very much, oh, that’s cool, let’s do that or try that. And really going through this process and reading and learning a whole lot more about the theories and the reasons why education is done a certain way really makes me stop and think first before I implement something, and I try to figure out why are we implementing it, what does the research say and what is this actually doing? (June, 2011)

According to Patricia Cranton (Kelly, 2010), “transformative learning can be promoted by using any strategy, activity, or resource that presents students with an alternative point of view. Readings from different perspectives, field experiences, videos, role plays, simulations, and asking challenging questions all have the potential to lead to transformative learning.” In a professional doctorate, different perspectives come not only from faculty and existing literature but also from peers in the doctoral program, experts in the discipline, and colleagues in professional practice. A curriculum that requires engagement and discourse with multiple stakeholders about existing research and theory can expose professionals to new information and other ways of thinking that they may not have encountered before. Not all of the new information that professionals encounter in doctoral programs, however, is disorienting or even relevant to them. Sometimes, the information may not be interesting at all, in which case they may not perceive the need for the information and may not be motivated to engage with it. Superficial engagement with new information can lead to assimilation of that information but not necessarily to change in existing conceptions (Dole & Sinatra, 1998). Thus, curriculum in a professional doctorate must be designed so that professionals engage deeply with multiple perspectives and participate in deep processing, critical reflection, and metacognition. We perceive transformation in a professional doctorate to be an evolutionary process that involves changes to prior knowledge and behaviours based on new conceptions and on exposure to theory, research, and multiple perspectives from peers and experts. In this regard, it is crucial that students immerse themselves in existing theories and research related to their problems of practice and conduct small research projects that facilitate contact with authentic data and stakeholders in their practice. According to another UF EdD EdTech student who participated in the focus group mentioned above,

I think that the big thing is really, before [entering the doctorate], I think the tendency was just, yeah, that sounds like a good idea, let’s do this, and now it’s more—let’s stop and look [at] why do we want to do this. How have other people done this? How successful have they been? What issue might come up if we try to do this or try to do that? And then, you know, once you actually implement something, whether it’s an approach or program or whatever, then there is a need also to go back and look at it and assess it. Did it make a change? You know, what did you learn? Were there things that went wrong? So, you know, not only looking at why do we want to do this, but now that we’ve done it how did it work, knowing how to assess it, and you know, reflecting on that. (June, 2011)

More recently, “a transformed way of understanding, or interpreting, or viewing something” (Meyer & Land, 2003, p. 4) has been termed a “threshold crossing.” A threshold crossing leads to a changed outlook on a discipline or a change in personal identity, but it is also integrative because learners connect previously unconnected issues to discover their “hidden interrelatedness” (pp. 4–5). Exposure to knowledge from a different area of discourse that contradicts existing knowledge and beliefs or to knowledge that is incoherent or incomplete can be troublesome for learners. In the case of professional doctorates, students begin their doctoral journeys with existing knowledge and beliefs grounded in practice and with prior academic experiences that may or may not have included research. Activities that force them to re-examine their practice through the lens of theory and existing research can lead them to new insights. Transformation has been described as a journey through preliminal, liminal, and postliminal stages, in which the “state of liminality” (p. 10) constitutes the learner’s struggle to integrate new knowledge or feel a loss of authenticity in their understanding before they can cross the threshold to reach a new understanding or let go of an old understanding. Transformation is a recursive process in a doctoral program because students continually confront new information, engage with it, and either assimilate it into their thinking or reject it. It is important to document transformation in a professional doctorate to ensure that the goals of the program are being fulfilled. For example, in the UF EdD EdTech, we attempt to identify how students have changed their approaches to professional initiatives at different stages of the program as a result of activities that connect theory, research, and practice and facilitate implementation and reflection (Kumar, 2014a).

Situated Learning

Online programs make it possible for students to continue working in their professional contexts or disciplines while pursuing areas of specialization related to their disciplines under the guidance of a faculty adviser or mentor. Embeddedness in authentic contexts presents professionals with unique opportunities to connect and apply their learning to their practice, which is a tenet of situated learning (Wenger, 1998). The online environment also enables those enrolled to engage in dialogue with others in their disciplines and in similar contexts around the world.

Within each discipline, learning is defined and bound by that discipline’s language, epistemology, and context (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999). According to Lave and Wenger (1991), participants in any community that is related to a discipline, profession, or topic of interest move from being beginners, or from being at the periphery of a discipline or community, to being experts, or integral parts of the community. In a professional doctorate, such learning or acquisition of expertise involves enculturation into the scholarship of a discipline and the acquisition of habits of mind specific to the discipline or research (Walker, Golde, Jones, Bueschel, & Hutchings, 2008). We agree with Lave and Wenger’s (1991) description of situated learning and communities of practice as unintentional and organic, but we posit that in a professional doctorate, it is possible to design environments that will foster a community of researching professionals and that in an online professional doctorate, the online environment can be powerful in facilitating discourse and reflection connected to participants’ practice. In the UF EdD EdTech, we have found that participation in a community can contribute both to the development of researching professionals and to their approaches to their professional environments, but we have also learned that the formation of that community will depend on the participation of the learners and on learning presence, which we discuss in chapter 3 (Kenney, Kumar, & Hart, 2013).

An example of a design consideration related to situated learning is our use of a cohort model, in which students belonging to a particular cohort begin our professional doctorate program at the same time and take required courses together over a specified period of time. This cohort model, in combination with strategies for building an online community, has helped form a community of researching professionals in the UF EdD EdTech. Students in each cohort have in common their involvement in the discipline of educational technology, which they practice or are hoping to practice, and their membership in a doctoral cohort (Kenney et. al., 2013). Therefore, they have a shared identity that gives them a sense of belonging, the common goals of engaging in research and completing their doctorates, and enculturation in the educational technology field. Data from our second cohort revealed that this shared purpose forms the foundation for interactions that lead to the formation of community; helps professionals share information, knowledge, concerns, and anxieties; and assists with solving problems together and supporting each other through the doctorate (Kenney et al., 2013). The UF EdD EdTech is designed to include multiple spaces for instructor- and student-led interactions, where professionals share their problems of practice, receive formative feedback from faculty and peers as they progress in their initial explorations of theory and research, build trust, apply new knowledge to their practice, and reflect on the results of applications individually and with peers.

The learning theories reviewed above can provide a conceptual basis for an online professional doctorate curriculum and can inform how it is designed to develop researching professionals who merge theory, research, and practice. In the following section, we illustrate how to operationalize such a curriculum by describing selected core courses during the first year of the UF EdD EdTech.

CONNECTING THEORY, RESEARCH, AND PRACTICE IN THE UF EDD EDTECH

In our program, students are expected to conduct research related to problems of practice in their professional contexts, in the process acquiring and applying foundational knowledge in educational technology and deep knowledge in an area of specialization. During the first two years, students, as a cohort, take required coursework as well as electives. They take their qualifying exams at the end of their second year and then work on their dissertations. Given the emphasis on solutions to real-world problems, students are encouraged to approach empirical research from a pragmatic perspective, using thought as an instrument for prediction and action (Kumar & Antonenko, 2014).

Professionals enter the UF EdD EdTech with substantial experiential knowledge in various disciplines, including education and educational technology, and with a passion for growth and a desire to improve professional practice. Drawing on their prior knowledge and aiming to foster systematic reflection on this knowledge, we use the learning theories presented above to design online coursework connecting theory, research, and practice. The first semester in the UF EdD EdTech is guided by two goals: (a) to help students identify one or two problems of practice that will act as a catalyst for their doctoral studies and (b) to acquaint students with foundational theories in educational technology. We designed two complementary courses to support these goals.

The first online course is a doctoral colloquium to help students define one or more problems of practice in preparation for their doctoral journeys. Based on specific questions, students identify one or two problems of practice that they consider most significant and that, if addressed, would influence their professional environments. They then explore existing research by reviewing related peer-reviewed articles, determining how others have studied and addressed the problem, and considering the theories and methodologies that inform research about the problem. After evaluating their findings, students may redefine their problems of practice or identify strategies for further exploration. While students continue to refine (and often change) their foci throughout the program, this experience gives them a foundation in an area connected to their professional needs as well as a process for synthesizing and evaluating empirical research, a skill that will develop during their second semester in the program.

Simultaneously, students reflect on their professional journeys and goals for the next five years by developing a teliography, or a future fictional autobiography. Then, they tentatively plan relevant scholarly activities to help them achieve their goals. At every stage of the course, students receive feedback not only from the instructor but also from their peers. Groups of peers working in similar professional environments are formed so that students can discuss their problems of practice and their research with others who are likely to have experiences with and interests in their professional contexts or research topics. For example, one such group comprised five professionals engaged in distance learning, faculty development, and instructional design in three community colleges, a large public university, and a for-profit organization.

The other course in the first semester, Foundations of Educational Technology, aims to initiate the first stages of perspective transformation (Mezirow, 1990). This course begins with a focus on the history of educational technology. Because most students have only viewed the field through the limited lenses of their professional contexts, they are typically both surprised and overwhelmed by the breadth of the field and its long history of development. Often, this wider perspective leads them to reconsider how they are defining the problems of practice identified in the colloquium course. Next, students are guided to compare and contrast major paradigms, theories, and perspectives in educational technology and to determine how these have influenced their practice. Most students have never thought about the philosophical and psychological world views behind their professional beliefs, nor have they considered the theories that guide their practice. This content further transforms their thinking and makes some students feel uncomfortable, especially when they recognize disconnects between their beliefs and their practice or between their personal world views and those of their colleagues, supervisors, or larger professional contexts. Students are also scaffolded to consider what constitutes socially responsible research in educational technology (Reeves, 2000). For many, this is the first time they have considered the social ramifications of research design, implementation, and application. In many ways, this content serves as a bridge between the first semester, when students gather empirical research about problems of practice and learn how that research fits within larger paradigms, theories, and perspectives in the field, and the second semester, when they delve more deeply into educational technology research.

The second semester begins with the course Issues and Trends in Educational Technology Research, which familiarizes students with common conceptual frameworks and existing methodological approaches in the discipline of educational technology. By analyzing empirical studies and comparing claims and evidence, students learn to critique the alignment of research questions, theories, and methods in educational technology research. Students then assemble rubrics to examine the quality and rigour in qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods research and articulate their emerging understanding of these methodological paradigms. Finally, students make their first attempt at devising a conceptual framework for their identified problem of practice and link the framework to appropriate data-collection and data-analysis methods. The development of scholarly thinking, which includes approaching existing research critically, is based on all three learning theories we described above: students encounter new knowledge and ways of thinking, collaboratively represent and evaluate their understanding in the rubrics they create and use, and apply the theory and research to their professional practice.

During the second semester, students also take their first required course in qualitative research, where they learn about different qualitative approaches and conduct small-scale qualitative research projects to investigate the problem of practice they have identified. Students may not yet have enough methodological knowledge to select a methodology for a robust study, but they are guided to focus on a question that they can explore using a basic qualitative analysis. This exercise provides them with their first opportunity to collect and analyze data related to their practices. It also allows them to talk to stakeholders related to their research interests and to gain exposure to research-participant perspectives; this often provides them with a different lens through which to view their research. For example, for her qualitative research project, a student who was a college instructor investigated how instructors were adapting to online teaching and which tools or strategies they used. Her interview results revealed that the instructors in her context were enthusiastic about integrating new technologies and did not struggle as much with online teaching as with the confusion and frustration of multiple technology initiatives being implemented each year at their institution. After reflecting on her project and rethinking her premises about the context and research problem, she decided to focus on the implementation of technology initiatives at institutions of higher education.

The first year ends with the course Doctoral Seminar in Educational Technology, in which students conduct a review of literature related to their problem of practice; the review includes literature not only in educational technology but also in the discipline in which they work or disciplines related to their problem of practice. Midway through the course, students create a visual representation of their emerging understanding of the theories, prior research, and methodological approaches related to their problem of practice, on which faculty and peers share formative feedback. One goal of the course is for students to assemble a conceptual framework that will visually represent salient literature that will fold into their dissertations and inform their research questions and methodological choices. A second goal is the writing of a literature review that includes the management of bibliographic resources and appropriate citations of research. Students use the book Six Steps to Writing a Literature Review (Machi & McEvoy, 2009) to help with the process. However, the final product is not a literature review in the traditional sense but a critical review of interdisciplinary theory, research, and methods that inform their problem of practice. In this course, students learn to take responsibility for synthesizing research, reviewing each other’s literature reviews, providing feedback on ideas and writing within small groups, and integrating that feedback into their work. Students who went through the first offering of the UF EdD EdTech later reported that they had struggled with writing a dissertation proposal and integrating feedback; thus, this course was added in order to model that process at the end of the first year of the program.

The final goal of this course is “rediagnosis” or “re-evaluation” (Knowles, 1984, p. 49), a process in which students make changes to their initial problem of practice or emerging research question and create a plan to review new literature based on what they have learned. For example, a community college librarian investigated online embedded librarianship as a means to support both face-to-face and online English composition courses. Her literature review included theories of online learning and instruction, prior research about information-literacy skills needed by learners, ways in which academic libraries have supported such learners, and current trends and research about embedded librarians. Based on her review, she concluded that although embedded librarians successfully contribute to information literacy in online settings, they tend to find the workload challenging. She therefore focused her dissertation research on how to reduce this workload and how to time the presence of embedded librarians in English composition courses so as to increase information literacy.

KEY CONSIDERATIONS

These four initial courses from the UF EdD EdTech illustrate how to design the curriculum in an online professional doctorate that intentionally connects theory, practice, and research and is grounded in adult learning theories. Our description of these courses focuses on the operationalization of adult learning theories for professional doctoral students; the online nature of these courses is discussed in detail in the next chapter. The online doctorate requires that the curriculum be designed with great forethought for professional learners who do not have opportunities to learn within an on-campus community and do not automatically make connections between theory, research, and practice on their own. In this section, we discuss key considerations for designing such a curriculum.

Keeping the curriculum relevant. The goals and purpose of an online professional doctorate form the foundation of curriculum design and the ways in which this design connects theory, research, and practice. What counts as knowledge and how it is assessed, taught, and applied will vary by discipline; however, the theories reviewed in this chapter apply to all adult learners and can, therefore, be integrated into all disciplines. Learners in an online professional doctorate often live and work at a distance from the university. The content of their academic pursuits must be relevant to their needs and goals and applicable to their professional contexts if they are to stay motivated; to this end, an online professional doctorate must provide opportunities for students to connect theory, practice, and research. In our experience, although professionals relate to theories most easily if they connect the theories to their experiences and contexts, they do not always do so on their own—curriculum must be designed for this purpose. At the same time, program leaders should be willing to adapt the curriculum to the changing needs of learners and the discipline. For example, during initial offerings of the UF EdD EdTech, the sharing of research on Twitter was not very prevalent. Later cohorts, however, were encouraged to create their own hashtag, and for the fourth cohort, we added content to the curriculum about how scholars use social media to disseminate their scholarship and to enhance their professional and academic presence.

Sequencing courses. With a cohort model in which all students take the same courses at the same time, the careful sequencing of courses and assignments can facilitate student development and progress. Based on feedback from our first cohort, we revised the sequence of courses so that research courses were offered earlier, and we mapped out activities that scaffolded students’ identification of areas of research specialization. Online professional doctorates that do not include planned coursework but rely on doctoral seminars and colloquia can also include such activities, as can individual advisers or mentors working with online professional doctoral students. We have been fortunate to work in a team environment, where the program coordinator plans the curriculum and all faculty members collaboratively make decisions on proposed courses and activities. While working with adjunct faculty or faculty from other programs, it is important to ensure that they are willing to collaborate and include activities in their courses that address the goals of the program curriculum, and that their course design is grounded in theories of adult learning.

Scaffolding and mentoring areas of specialization. In addition to including the required content (e.g., theories, research methods, scholarly approaches) that is essential to a terminal degree in a particular discipline, scaffolding the students’ selection of areas of specialization can contribute to transformational learning. Professionals often identify multiple areas of interest and problems of practice, but not all of them can be addressed during a doctorate, and it may not be possible to research certain ideas without access to funding; therefore, faculty advising and mentoring is important for guiding students in choosing areas of specialization in a professional doctorate. In the UF EdD EdTech, students sometimes also find that their initial research questions have been partially answered in prior research and that new research questions emerge. Extensive feedback and dialogue are valuable in advising students at this stage, especially because online professional doctoral students are not embedded in a university environment and are therefore sometimes unfamiliar with the types of research expected in the doctorate and with ethical and political considerations that delimit research in professional contexts. Furthermore, guiding professionals to set goals and milestones early in an online program can increase their self-direction and accountability for learning.

Implementing projects, reflecting, and sharing with peers. In addition to connecting theory and research to practice, the curriculum should provide opportunities to implement small projects that facilitate reflection on content such as research questions or instructional design, research design or implementation, and results. Moreover, sharing these experiences with peers in a cohort has been extremely valuable to students in the UF EdD EdTech because others in the field are able to provide important perspectives. For example, a student describing a faculty development project to her peers received feedback from another faculty developer about her experiences implementing such a project and from an instructor who had attended similar faculty development events. In another instance, a middle school teacher using particular theories to design instruction to foster metacognition received feedback from an elementary school teacher and a college instructor who had used the same theories to design their instruction. The online program can provide a safe environment in which students can participate in candid, encouraging discussions with colleagues who do not work at the same institution as them; this opportunity has been highly valued by students in our online professional doctorate. The implementation of small projects, reflection on the process and outcomes, and discussion with peers has led to the transformative learning, re-evaluation of understanding, and critical thinking that is essential for a scholar. Nevertheless, students in certain professional contexts (e.g., some corporations, the military) have experienced challenges in implementing, reporting on, and discussing such projects during their tenure in our program because of issues of confidentiality.

CONCLUSION

The learning and teaching experiences of educators designing and implementing online professional doctorates are often grounded in research-based, discipline-specific, on-campus doctoral education, which is distinct from the curriculum and experiences needed by researching professionals in an online professional doctorate. To assist program leaders with curriculum design, this chapter provided an overview of how Knowles’s (1984) theory of andragogy, Mezirow’s (1990) theory of transformative learning, and Lave and Wenger’s (1991) work on situated learning can be relevant to professionals aiming to apply existing knowledge to their own research in their contexts. Online courses, seminars, and interactions that bridge transactional distance between professional learners, their instructors, and their peers and that also integrate theory, research, and professional practice must be purposefully designed in advance and cannot be left to chance or negotiated on the fly. Online curriculum design should ensure that the goals of the professional doctorate are achieved, but it should also allow professionals sufficient flexibility to accommodate their diverse research interests, professional goals, and motivations for completing a doctorate.