“I Am Proud of This Internal Transformation”: Supporting Ph.D. Candidates’ Construction of a Researcher Identity

• In Event: A Continuum of Constructivism: From Childhood to Candidacy

Abstract

Purposes
The purpose of this study was to explore the developmental research perspectives of Curriculum and Instruction PhD students’ using a case study approach. We were interested in exploring how the sample doctoral students/candidates think about their identities as early career researchers and trying to identify what some of the key contributors are to developing a scholarly sense of self-efficacy and identity. We are curious about how to better facilitate and develop the self-transforming mindset within our doctoral students/candidates.

Perspectives
The research-practice gap has persisted since the mid 1900s and continues to be a problem today (Broekkamp & van-Hout Wolters, 2008; Fraser & Lefty, 2018). Teachers often inadvertently implement teaching strategies that are not empirically supported, and educational researchers often conduct inapplicable, irrelevant, and inaccessible studies (Gore & Gitlin, 2004; Howard-Jones, 2014). The disconnect is commonly associated with differences in researchers’ and practitioners’ training, knowledge bases, ideologies, epistemologies, goals, and job demands (DeVries & Pieters, 2007; Farley-Ripple et al., 2018; Vanderlinde & van Braak, 2010). One potential method of bridging research and practice is to train PhD students/candidates to conceptualize, design, and conduct studies in K-12 classrooms where they teach. This type of action-based research is increasingly common; however, there is a paucity of research that investigates doctoral student/candidate experiences using a phenomenological approach.

Methods
This study used a qualitative case study design and purposive sampling of PhD students/candidates participating in an Elementary Education SIG during academic years 2021-22/2022-23 (Crowe et al., 2011). We used a collective case study format which “involves studying multiple cases simultaneously…in an attempt to generate a still broader appreciation of a particular issue” (Crowe et al., 2011, Discussion Section).

Evidence
We used the procedures below to gather evidence of the candidates’ development as scholars throughout the experience.
1. An initial and final reflection prompt that will allow participants to share in their own words how they define “research.”
2. An interview/focus group approach to further solicit participants’ articulations of their understanding, processes, and development as emerging researchers.
3. Zoom recordings of the SIG meetings, field notes, and SIG-related work products for content analysis.

Results
Last year, we presented on the initial findings from academic year 2021-22 (see Table 2). While we did not anticipate the candidates wanting to continue with the SIG throughout 2022-23, we continued to collect data until the time of this writing. Results of the entire two-year project will be presented at the annual meeting in April.

Scholarly Significance of the Work
This study will contribute to the literature regarding the research-practice gap in the field of education. This case study addressed PhD students’/candidates’ experiences – and the meaning they made from them – both as teachers and researchers. Studying the students’/candidates’ progress and their perceptions of educational research before, during, and after the SIG experience will provide insight on the affordances of a K-12 classroom immersive research experience. Specifically, this study will shed light on emerging scholars’ perceptions of research-practice integration.

Authors

• Karyn A. Allee, Mercer University

• Amanda Seccia, Nazareth University

• Katie Meissner, Mercer University