Volume 13, 2018

Accepted by Editor Nicole A. Buzzetto-Hollywood │Received: October 3, 2017│ Revised: January 4, January
26, 2018 │ Accepted: February 12, 2018.
Cite as: Ames, C., Berman, R., & Casteel, A. (2018). A preliminary examination of doctoral student retention
factors in private online workspaces. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 79-107.
https://doi.org/10.28945/3958

(CC BY-NC 4.0) This article is licensed to you under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
License. When you copy and redistribute this paper in full or in part, you need to provide proper attribution to it to ensure
that others can later locate this work (and to ensure that others do not accuse you of plagiarism). You may (and we encour-
age you to) adapt, remix, transform, and build upon the material for any non-commercial purposes. This license does not
permit you to use this material for commercial purposes.

A PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION OF DOCTORAL STUDENT
RETENTION FACTORS IN PRIVATE ONLINE WORKSPACES
Cathrine Ames * Grand Canyon University,

Phoenix, Arizona, USA
[email protected]

Ronald Berman Grand Canyon University,
Phoenix, Arizona, USA

[email protected]

Alex Casteel Grand Canyon University,
Phoenix, Arizona, USA

[email protected]

* Corresponding author

ABSTRACT
Aim/Purpose The purpose of this quantitative descriptive study is to provide a preliminary

examination of students’ retention factors of engagement, communication, and
isolation that may be affected by the introduction and use of online communi-
ties for dissertation development within an online doctoral program.

Background This research is a continuation of the university’s 5-year research initiative to
address the high national rate of doctoral attrition by investigating whether pri-
vate online workspaces provide a virtual platform to increase student interac-
tion, enhance student communication, and reduce student perception of isola-
tion.

Methodology A quantitative descriptive study of 698 doctoral students (n1 = 355, n2 = 179, n3
= 184) in the online environment across three survey periods over a span of 30
months.

Contribution In 30 months, student engagement increased, perceptions of effective commu-
nication by students with dissertation committees improved, and student per-
ceptions of isolation remained unchanged.

Findings The implementation of online workspaces for doctoral students addressed fac-
tors experienced in online doctoral programs. The introduction of private doc-
toral workspaces significantly improved doctoral students’ perceptions of more
effective communication with their dissertation committees. Perceptions of
isolation remained unchanged with the introduction of the technology.

Retention Factors in Private Online Workspaces

80

Recommendations
for Practitioners

Universities and faculty should make proactive efforts to utilize the online tools
available to them to facilitate improved communication and reduce isolation
within online doctoral programs.

Recommendation
for Researchers

The implementation of online workspaces appears to mitigate some factors
associated with student attrition, but the extent of these changes is unknown.
Future research should continue to examine the factors of retention as a path-
way to reducing attrition within the online learning environment.

Impact on Society The implementation of private online workspaces appears to lessen factors as-
sociated with student attrition, providing opportunities for improved utilization
of personal and university resources, improved professional standing for gradu-
ates, and an enhanced reputation for online learning programs.

Future Research Further examination is needed to determine to what extent various communica-
tion methods affect a student’s experience and increase connectivity between
the student and the institution, as well as research to better understand the phe-
nomenon of students’ perceptions of isolation within online environments.

Keywords online learning, private workspaces, retention, attrition, isolation, communica-
tion, student engagement, connectedness, doctoral programs

INTRODUCTION
For decades, attrition from doctoral programs has averaged between 40% and 70% (Bowen &
Rudenstine, 1992; Gardner & Gopaul, 2012; Lovitts, 2001; Spaulding & Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2012)
while attrition for online students is an additional 10% to 20% higher (Allen & Seaman, 2011; Mar-
shall, Greenberg, & Machun, 2012; Rovai, 2002). Retaining doctoral students is a multifaceted prob-
lem affecting institutions and students worldwide. Doctoral student attrition is costly personally, pro-
fessionally, and financially (Burkholder, 2012). Doctoral students incur debt, faculty invest time, and
universities use resources for doctoral students who do not complete their program of study. Alt-
hough doctoral students often experience high academic achievement in coursework (Ali & Kohun,
2006; Gardner, 2008; Lovitts, 2001), other factors contribute to doctoral attrition, such as navigating
the complex dissertation stage (Baker, Pifer, & Flemion, 2013; Golde & Dore, 2001; Lovitts, 2001),
and feelings of isolation (Gardner, 2008, 2010; Golde, 2005; Hawlery, 2003; Lovitts, 2001; Rovai,
2002; Tinto, 1993). Coursework is only one measure of academic status, and it is important that doc-
toral students are able to navigate the research terrain (Card, Chambers, & Freeman, 2016).

Completing the unstructured dissertation stage is a major component of experiencing success in a
doctoral program. Many doctoral students drop out before completing the dissertation phase due to
unclear expectations, poor communication, and feeling isolated (Golde, 2005). Smallwood (2004)
refers to the high rates of attrition as a “scandal” and suggests that attrition is a fundamental prob-
lem of doctoral programs in the United States. The transition to independent scholarship can be
daunting for doctoral students as they transform into independent researchers. Students experience
challenges in the dissertation phase because the dissertation stage necessitates doctoral students tran-
sition from being dependent students participating in structured courses to independent students
creating new knowledge (Ewing, Mathieson, Alexander, & Leafman, 2012; Golde & Dore, 2001;
Lovitts, 2001). Doctoral students need extra support during the dissertation phase when they en-
counter unexpected problems, which intensify their challenges (Berman, Grant, & Markette, 2012;
Gardner, 2008; Gomez, 2013; Lovitts, 2001).

The exponential growth of online learning is another factor that influences doctoral education and
attrition. Online education offers the advantages of increasing flexibility, asynchronous instruction,
bridging geographical barriers, and time for reflection. In contrast, online education can produce en-
vironments lacking in collaboration, leading to isolation and miscommunication. Although traditional

Ames, Berman, & Casteel

81

classrooms provide interaction for students, online students do not have the same opportunity, which
causes a physical distance barrier (Ali & Kohun, 2006; Bolliger & Inan, 2012; Rovai, 2002). To ac-
commodate the distinctive needs of online doctoral students, the focus is shifting to psychosocial
aspects of integration, which includes offering technology-based tools for students, enabling connec-
tion to create a sense of community (Bolliger & Inan, 2012).

To explore online doctoral students in the dissertation stage, the current study examines several gaps
in extant literature. As graduate programs experience unprecedented growth, high attrition rates are
problematic (Ewing et al., 2012), particularly as more doctoral programs are going online (Rockin-
son-Szapkiw, 2012).This study also investigates which approaches are needed to increase persistence
in doctoral students (Allen & Seaman, 2011; Bean & Eaton, 2000; Berman et al., 2012; Gardner,
2008). In addition, the current study is a preliminary examination of two technology-based advance-
ments currently used as conduits to enhance effectiveness and retention within a doctoral program
for doctoral students who are at the dissertation stage. The purpose of this quantitative descriptive
study is to provide a preliminary examination of students’ retention factors of engagement, commu-
nication, and isolation that may be affected by the introduction and use of online communities for
dissertation development within an online doctoral program, and then to recommend that those fac-
tors be investigated in future study. The first system explored is the Doctoral Community Network™
(DC Network), which is an online scholarly community for doctoral students and faculty. The second
system is the private doctoral workspace, a virtual website within the DC Network for doctoral stu-
dents in the dissertation stage.

BACKGROUND

DOCTORAL COM M UN ITY N ETWORK
To address the growing concern of online doctoral attrition, a multi-year research initiative was in-
troduced at the current university. The first phase of the research initiative was to launch the Doctor-
al Community Network. The DC Network is a student-driven, online scholarly community designed
to help doctoral students complete their dissertation and program of study and is a forum visible to
all doctoral students attending the university. In a web-based virtual location, the DC Network pro-
vides comprehensive support services to assist new researchers as they learn to become independent
scholars, capable of producing high-quality research (Berman et al., 2012). Using a collaborative
technology, the DC Network is a resource for new researchers to receive feedback on prospective
research from a nationwide research community. Having confidence in research-related tasks may
lead to successful completion of research (Kahn & Scott, 1997; Lambie, Hayes, Griffith, Limberg, &
Mullen, 2014; Phillips & Russell, 1994), and research anxiety is more common in online students
(DeVaney, 2010). Using the DC Network may mitigate research stress in distance barriers for novice
researchers. Doctoral students can post research questions on the DC Network, and faculty and oth-
er doctoral students can offer feedback, suggestions, and references. In addition, the DC Network
provides resources, templates, webinars, and video tutorials from experts in qualitative and quantita-
tive research. Experts include faculty and support staff in the fields of social sciences, leadership,
business, and technology.

PRIVATE DOCTORAL WORKSPACES
Expanding the DC Network in 2014 offered further support for doctoral students working on their
dissertation. A private doctoral workspace, as the name suggests, is a private online environment ac-
cessible only to the doctoral student and the dissertation committee. The private doctoral workspace
was established for each student to facilitate communication and progression as they interact with
their committee members. The private doctoral workspaces enable doctoral students to share manu-
scripts, track milestones and communicate with committee members, and serve as repositories for
items related to the dissertation, including documents and communication between committee mem-

Retention Factors in Private Online Workspaces

82

bers, which are are maintained until the doctoral students graduate. Communication records include
emails via the native system and recorded video conferences. Technological advances provide oppor-
tunities for effective communication for knowledge and information sharing, which may improve
experiences for online students (Hogg & Lomicky, 2012). Before developing the private doctoral
workspace, the dissertation communication process was fragmented, restricting dissertation commit-
tee oversight. Faculty and students communicated almost entirely through email. Thus, faculty and
dissertation committee members were unable to ascertain the doctoral student’s dissertation progress
quickly and document revisions were unavailable and unorganized.

The private doctoral workspace is a unique reference and communication system, providing each
doctoral student a method for communication and resources. The dissertation process is often mis-
understood by doctoral students (Gardner, 2008; Golde & Dore, 2001; Lovitts, 2005), and acquiring
research skills is fundamental for successful completion of a dissertation. Therefore, the private doc-
toral workspace is designed to support the needs of novice doctoral researchers who are learning to
research and who may require assistance during the dissertation process. Since the research process
may overwhelm new students, collaborative experiences in research forums may enable the develop-
ment of research skills for novice researchers (Coryell & Murray, 2014).

PURPOSE OF TH E STUDY
Educational shifts due to advances in technology and the influx of online doctoral students provide
opportunities to examine new approaches to meet the needs of doctoral students in the dissertation
stage. The purpose of this quantitative descriptive study is to provide a preliminary examination of
student retention factors of engagement, communication, and isolation that may be improved by the
introduction and use of online communities for dissertation development within an online doctoral
program. With the popularity of online learning, it is increasingly important to reduce students’ feel-
ings of isolation (Ali & Kohun, 2007; Bolliger & Inan, 2012; Rovai, 2002). Moreover, this study seeks
to offer preliminary feedback to guide the further development of the virtual workspace and tools
for online doctoral leaners. Demand for online doctoral programs is increasing (Fuller, Risner,
Lowder, Hart, & Bachenheimer, 2014), and researchers are investigating using virtual communities to
reduce feelings of isolation in doctoral students (Berman, Radda, & Cross, 2013). In response to the
incursion of online students, developments in technology, and continuing high rates of doctoral attri-
tion, it is important to identify approaches that meet the needs of doctoral students in the twenty-
first century.

LITERATURE REVIEW

T H EORETICAL FRAM EWORK
Bean’s (1980) causal model of student retention provides the framework from which the hypotheses
in the current study were derived. The theoretical framework is an important component because it
provides meaning for the investigation, and it helps define the research scope. Student departure has
long been a question of interest to administrators and scholars. Bean’s model originates from Tinto’s
(1975) student integration model. Tinto’s Model (1975) highlights that institutions of higher educa-
tion can improve student persistence through student academic and social integration. Bean’s model
expands on Tinto’s and demonstrates that there is a relationship between student retention and insti-
tutional commitment and student satisfaction with the institution. Bean submits that feelings of vali-
dation are important to students, and when students have a connection with the organization, it re-
duces their sense of isolation.

DOCTORAL PROGRAM S WORLDWIDE
The contour of global higher education is evolving to include more doctoral programs worldwide.
Internationally, doctoral studies are increasing (Sampson, Johnston, Comer, & Brogt, 2015). Advanc-

Ames, Berman, & Casteel

83

es in information technology and communication modalities have allowed exponential expansion of
programs worldwide. Upwards of 450 higher education programs exist globally, with half of the
programs residing in the United States (Rumbley et al., 2014), which include approximately 311,204
international students who are enrolled in U.S. universities (Campbell, 2015). Outside of the U.S.
borders, 48 countries worldwide support 217 institutions or centers focusing on tertiary education,
and postsecondary education accounts for more than 170 million students worldwide (Rumbley et al.,
2014). The higher education field is expanding to include increasing global participation, necessitating
different infrastructures and approaches.

Prior research indicates that there are notable differences between doctoral programs worldwide.
Doctoral programs in the United States typically require coursework that is followed by a disserta-
tion. In contrast, European doctoral degrees tend to be research-based without the requirement of
coursework (Freeman, Hagedorn, Goodchild, & Wright, 2014). Higher education in the United
Kingdom focuses solely on the research project, which starts at the onset of the program. Doctoral
students develop academic knowledge during the master’s degree program and apply the knowledge
toward research within the doctoral program (Barnett, Harris, & Mulvany, 2017). The student works
alongside a mentor, usually a committee member, to develop and present research with minimal pro-
grammed coursework.

Unlike most North American universities, and similar to European programs, PhD students in Aus-
tralia tend to not have structured coursework. The Australian PhD program is solely research-based
(Fotovatian, 2012). However, Australia and other countries, including China and Iceland, have seen a
recent shift toward the development of professional doctorates that emphasize field-based and ap-
plied research. Professional doctorates were developed to offer greater quantity of practical high-
level knowledge, as well as to address high attrition rates associated with theory-based degrees, such
as the PhD (Wildy, Peden, & Chan, 2015). Although similarities are found in European and Australi-
an programs, other countries have different requirements.

Due to distinct differences in doctoral programs worldwide, making comparisons between various
doctoral programs is challenging. For example, Misu (2012) conducted an international study to
compare doctoral career studies; however, Misu found that analyzing the study survey was difficult
due to country inconsistencies. For example, German doctoral candidates work with master supervi-
sors for several years as paid employees. In contrast, South African PhD Educational students are
part-time students, and, often, U.S. research assistants receive a part-time salary. France employs a
collaborative partnership model in which, with the aid of university staff, company employees con-
duct research on behalf of the company (Angelier, 2012). Parameters for doctoral programs vary,
and, to date, there is not a common methodology or accepted protocol across all international pro-
grams.

The emergence of global higher education in the 21st century has broadened the scope of higher
education worldwide. The higher educational terrain comprises global criteria that may be articulated
depending on the context of the country’s standing in the labor market, the geopolitical climate, or
the economy (Samuel, 2014). Thus, to understand parameters for doctoral programs on an interna-
tional level, awareness of national infrastructure is necessary. Although there are notable internation-
al differences in doctoral programs, there are also commonalities. In terms of research production
and creating new knowledge, doctoral candidates are valuable, regardless of the country in which
they reside. In addition, doctoral programs worldwide are expanding, with highly developed countries
comprising more programs for doctoral students. Differences between international doctoral pro-
grams can be mitigated somewhat through online delivery. Online doctoral programs permit students
to reach across national borders to achieve a terminal degree.

Retention Factors in Private Online Workspaces

84

DOCTORAL ATTRITION
To combat the high rates of doctoral attrition, leaders in higher education continue to examine strat-
egies to increase the progress of doctoral students. The recent influx of online learning adds unique
challenges to developing approaches to retain doctoral students. While some attrition is expected,
student retention in higher education is a significant and ongoing problem (Council of Graduate
Schools, 2010; Wildy et al., 2015). For universities that are focusing on how to compete in national
rankings and improve instruction, termination of the PhD trajectory is detrimental (Van de Schoot,
Yerkes, Mouw, & Sonneveld, 2013). Doctoral attrition is a decades-old and multifaceted problem,
affecting institutions and students worldwide.

It is important to note that doctoral departure is not limited to students who are academically inca-
pable of completing a doctoral degree. Often there is little academic difference between completers
and noncompleters. Doctoral students feel ill-equipped for the rigors of the doctoral program or
they lack of adequate financial resources; therefore, they fail to complete their dissertation (Van der
Haert, Ortiz, Emplit, Halloin, & Dehon, 2014). Doctoral programs are demanding, and, frequently,
students are surprised to find they are not prepared for the dissertation process (Baker et al., 2013;
Golde & Dore, 2001; Holbrook et al., 2014; Lovitts, 2001). The dissertation stage is complex, involv-
ing independent scholarship that entails selecting a topic that contributes new knowledge to the field,
designing a feasible study, synthesizing large amounts of empirical literature, successfully collecting
data, and correctly analyzing the data. Students assert that the doctoral process is complicated and
isolating, and they expect scaffolded learning assistance (Naidoo, 2015). Independent research can be
daunting to novice researchers, as they are working alone to develop new research-related skills. In-
creasing doctoral retention requires developing holistic approaches that create opportunities for
growth of doctoral students who are in the challenging dissertation stage.

NAVIGATIN G TH E DISSERTATION PROCESS
A central tenet of doctoral education is for students to transform from students to independent
scholars so they can complete their dissertation and conduct research that adds to the existing body
of knowledge in their fields. Doctoral students must apply what they have learned from their
coursework to create new knowledge in their field of study. The transition from consumers of
knowledge to creators of original research is challenging for new researchers (Lovitts, 2001). Coryell
and Murray (2014) posit that novice researchers must learn to construct new knowledge and deter-
mine what research is valuable, and that process is overwhelming for new students. Many doctoral
students are unprepared for the rigors of academia and are overwhelmed with the technology used in
doctoral programs, as well (Salani, Albuja, & Azaiza, 2016).

Before the dissertation stage, doctoral students in the United States are usually enrolled in structured
classroom environments. During the unstructured dissertation period, however, students must self-
regulate their progress, produce scholarly writing, and navigate the research arena. A dissertation in-
volves thinking in new and creative ways (Lovitts, 2005), which can present challenges. Inherent in
the dissertation process are the requirements to problem solve, acquire research skills, think critically,
be resourceful, work independently, and add to the existing body of knowledge. Berman et al. (2012)
posited that doctoral students require additional support during the dissertation phase when they
encounter unexpected problems. Supervisors are tasked with developing research competencies in
students, while simultaneously encouraging independence (Orellana, Darder, Pérez, & Salinas, 2016).
When students are confident in research-oriented activities, they more likely have the ability to per-
form research-related tasks (Lambie et al., 2014). Hence, to facilitate the progress of emerging schol-
ars, it is important to develop pragmatic solutions to allow new researchers to become successful as
they endeavor to produce academic research.

Ames, Berman, & Casteel

85

ON LIN E DOCTORAL STUDEN TS
The ongoing proliferation of online doctoral students necessitates attention to the delivery of doc-
toral education to meet the unique needs of the online doctoral student. Demand for online doctoral
programs is increasing (Fuller et al., 2014). In the twelfth annual report involving survey responses
from over 2,800 universities and colleges about online higher education within the United States, the
Babson Report stated that more than seven million students were enrolled in online classes in 2013
(Allen & Seaman, 2015). Overcoming the barrier of distance can be difficult for online instructors
and students. Retention is lower in online programs than traditional programs (Hachey, Wladis, &
Conway, 2012). This evidence indicates a need to provide approaches that enable progress for doc-
toral students who are geographically distributed.

Online learning is not new; however, the Internet has led to an increase in the proliferation of online
educational opportunities. The traditional brick and mortar environment is losing its monopoly
(Nguyen, 2015). Studies have identified that, while online students do not have an advantage of being
face-to-face with peers and instructors, online environments can be just as effective as brick and
mortar settings. According to a meta-analysis by Lack (2013), the difference between online educa-
tion and traditional brick and mortar education is negligible. Scholars differ in their opinions on the
effectiveness of online education. Kumar, Johnson, and Hardemon (2013) conducted an interview of
nine doctoral students and concluded that online students and students in face-to-face programs had
similar challenges. Whether the students were online or not, the students in the study wanted timely
and concise feedback from faculty, especially because several of them worked full-time. Online doc-
toral students differ from traditional students in experiencing a sense of community, and understand-
ing this concept is important to create infrastructures for support (Berry, 2017). Research consistent-
ly shows that many of the doctoral needs are similar between face-to-face and online doctoral stu-
dents. Equipping online doctoral students so they can successfully reach benchmarks and contribute
to their field is helpful in developing a program for success.

Another noticeable group of online students who are becoming increasingly common in doctoral
programs are nontraditional students. Nontraditional students have careers, are older, are part-time
students, and ultimately may not be seeking full-time faculty positions (Offerman, 2011). The doctor-
al process is complicated, and many students are novice doctoral students and simultaneously work-
ing professionals (Bennett & Folley, 2014). Educators are searching for approaches to respond to the
needs of nontraditional doctoral students who are geographically distributed and part-time. Remote
students must rely on systems that enable communication management such as email, video, and vir-
tual learning environments (Orellana et al., 2016). It is important to examine methods that enable
remote, nontraditional students to succeed in doctoral programs, especially as they enter the challeng-
ing dissertation phase. Even traditional students working on their dissertation communicate primarily
with their dissertation chairs in an online format (Terrell, Snyder, Dringus, & Maddrey, 2012). In es-
sence, many students in the dissertation stage become online students. Online dissertation students
have no tangible connection with the physical institution or faculty members, which can present chal-
lenges.

Overcoming the barrier of distance during the dissertation stage can be difficult for doctoral stu-
dents and faculty. To accommodate the unique needs of online doctoral students, the focus is shift-
ing to include more integration, which includes offering technology-based tools for students to con-
nect with peers and faculty members to create a sense of community (Bolliger & Inan, 2012). The
interaction between students and instructors is essential (Sull, 2013; Vekkaila, Virtanen, Taina, & Py-
hältö, 2016). Faculty play a central role in guiding doctoral students during the dissertation stage to
facilitate student progress during the tenuous dissertation phase. Research shows that when doctoral
students have access to faculty and the faculty spend time with the students, it contributes to student’
success (Bagaka’s, Badillo, Bransteter, & Rispinto 2015; Hoffman, 2014). It is advantageous for stu-
dents to develop relationships with faculty because, through that association, it is likely they will re-
ceive more support and resources, enabling degree completion (Newberry & DeLuca, 2013). Mitigat-

Retention Factors in Private Online Workspaces

86

ing potential distance barriers and cultivating a means of collaboration between online doctoral stu-
dents and faculty can be essential for doctoral students’ success. Much of the communication be-
tween doctoral students and their dissertation committees happens online (Kumar et al., 2013).
Communication and physical …

Cynthia Bainbridge, Grand Canyon University
June Maul, Grand Canyon University

Cristie McClendon, Grand Canyon University

This study examines doctoral student perceptions regarding learning acquired during a weeklong
residency program wherein they were exposed to a strategic framework designed to help conceptualize
the design for their dissertation study. Using a simple quantitative, pre-experimental, one group pre-
post-test, design, a questionnaire was developed to measure student perceptions. During the residency,

and psychology. The 10-point model provides a multifaceted approach to enabling doctoral students to
conceptualize the design for their own doctoral dissertation working within an environment that supports
cognitive and social development. This approach provides students with a model and faculty feedback
to create an aligned research study early in their program of study. Students responded to 15 questions
regarding their understanding of the 10 required components of the study on Day 2 and again on Day 4
of the residency. Data were analyzed using Wilcoxen Signed Rank Test. The results indicated there was

10 strategic points model between the pre-posttest results.

Keywords: dissertation, research design, doctoral students, research, cognitive development,
constructivism, mental models, experiential learning

As the number of doctoral programs continues
to grow among universities across the United States,
there is a need to address a number of the challenges
these institutions and their students face. Attrition
rates are high in doctoral programs for education,

problems for these programs can include unexpected
and lengthy amounts of time to degree completion
and lack of preparation on the part of the doctoral

In 2008, the time it took to complete a doctoral
degree was estimated as between 7 and 12 years

the past two decades, doctoral education has been

the focus of heightened attention, due to increased
accountability and interest in the effectiveness of
these programs (Anderson et al., 2013).

While there are some challenges associated with
the structure of and completion rates in doctoral
programs, the attainment of a doctoral degree has

for the institutions and organizations they will work
in the future. Doctoral students contribute to the
creation of new ideas and approaches to learning

Hickey, 2006). Thus, obtaining a doctorate provides
career opportunities for students as they begin to
apply their scholarly leadership in the job market.
Additionally, through applying their research skills
and experience, graduates can forge relationships

between academia and outside organizations
(Thune, 2009). The development of these new
academic leaders is incumbent upon universities
providing effective and timely programs.

To address challenges and to further realize
these opportunities, it is important to improve the

are important when considering the design of
doctoral programs (Jones, 2013). Pertaining to
academics, there have been recommendations
that promote a structured, systematic curriculum
and milestones in these programs (Anderson et
al., 2013). Socialization, which involves adapting
the values, knowledge and capabilities in a given
society, is also important for the success of the
doctoral learner. Innate psychological needs, such
as autonomy and a sense of relatedness, may provide
the motivation needed to be successful in doctoral
programs (Mason, 2012). Gardner (2010) found that
“faculty members’ contributions to the socialization
of students go beyond the explicit expectations as
determined in the faculty role, including teaching,
advising, and career preparation, to the more implicit
expectations of their behaviors, mannerisms, and
attitudes” (p. 49-50). Universities are providing
additional focus on developing the research skills
and the pedagogy to address this need (Wagner,

Doctoral students often experience a lack of
knowledge and preparedness as they begin the
dissertation phase of the program, perhaps the
most challenging part of the degree. This phase
requires extraordinary effort and persistence on the
part of the learner (Lindsay, 2015). A systematic
and carefully designed approach and support
systems can facilitate their journey, success, and
persistence through this process. There is greater
need, though, to create an understanding of the
structure of these supports and how they improve
student understanding of the foundational design
elements of their dissertation study. This article
presents a 10-point strategic framework students
can use to create a design for their own doctoral
research study within a doctoral residency that
focuses on enabling their cognitive, social, and
emotional development.

The purpose of this study was to determine

doctoral students’ perceptions of the learning they
gained from the use of a 10-point strategic framework
within the context of this weeklong residency
program in an online Ed.D. doctoral program
at a university located within the southwestern
United States. Doctoral students completed a self-
assessment of their level of understanding of how to
conceptualize and develop each of the components
of the 10-point strategic framework for their own
dissertation research at the beginning and end of
the residency program. The following research
question guided this study:

1. How did participation in a weeklong
residency program focused on experiential
and social learning change doctoral students’
perceived level of knowledge regarding their
ability to conceptualize a 10-point strategic
framework for their dissertation study?

Experiential Learning and Constructivism
The theoretical foundations of experiential-

based learning and constructivism provide the basis
for the design of the learning environment, within
which, the student uses this strategic framework to
conceptualize the design for their research study.
This approach to learning enables doctoral students
to design and conduct research successfully to
complete their dissertations within an online
doctoral program in a timely fashion. The use of
experiences, which engage students socially and
emotionally, and at the same time, facilitate their
cognitive development through a constructivist
approach to learning, are hoped to contribute to
the successful complete of doctoral dissertations
as well as reduced cycle times by providing the
skills and motivation needed. This study focused
on obtaining the students’ perceptions of the
learning they gained from the use of this strategic
framework within the context of this one-week
residency program.

The focus of the weeklong doctoral residency
program is to provide doctoral students the
opportunity to develop a 10-point strategic
framework for the design for their own doctoral
dissertation. This process involves developing
knowledge in research, as well, as developing the
cognitive ability to construct the elements of the

design and approach for the research study. Wagner
et al. (2011) argued that there is a need to create a
pedagogical culture focused on enabling students to
learn the art of research. They presented arguments
to support Brew’s (2003) perspective that research
approaches should be developed, or constructed
by the student, rather than transmitted by the
faculty member. This method of teaching research

approach to learning, which involves the student
exploring, discovering, and inventing, thus

becomes the center of learning as they manipulate
their world of research with the intent to make
sense of that work and generate new mental models
(Piaget, 1980). Constructivists pose that students
learn, not through receiving information from
teachers, but rather through active engagement with
their environment where they form new knowledge
and models (Raskin, 2002).

With regard to the 10-point strategic
framework, students use mental or visual models,
with carefully orchestrated guidance from faculty
to envision, construct, and design their own
research study. Visual models and pictures help
people to comprehend new knowledge and create
their own mental models for future use (Glenberg

information can help a person integrate information
derived from propositional and perceptual
materials. Glenberg and Langston (1992) provided
this example to illustrate this integration:

….a text could describe features of an object
(e.g., its mass and density), a picture could
indicate the object’s location in space, and
the representational element in the mental
model could link the information sources so
that they are conceived of as pertaining to
the same object. (p. 5)

The use of mental models enables a person to
“notice” that which enhances their comprehension

Then, as the mental model is developed, the student
focuses attention on or notices the new element.
Use of pictures or visuals not only help to construct
the mental model, but also help to manage the

Langston, 1992). The 10-point strategic framework

helps students “visualize” their study, along with
the interconnectedness of the key components of
their dissertation research plan.

Primary Components of the Residency Program
Enabling Students to Design their Research

There are three primary components of the
residency program that enable the students to
design the 10-point strategic framework for their
own research. First, a visual mental model for
research is presented. Secondly, students spend

designing the 10-point strategic framework for
their own proposed doctoral dissertation. Finally,

dissertation chairs that have successfully coached
a number of students through the dissertation
process. Additionally, these faculty members
support and coach other chairs, assuming the role
of coaches, rather than teachers. This framework
or design was supported by Walker, Golde, Jones,
Bueschel, and Hutchins (2008) who suggested that

engaging in exchange of ideas and dialogue with
experienced researchers and faculty members.
Furthermore, the use of deliberately framed

engaging social interaction, improves the student’s
ability to think about their study. The students
are able to make a connection between their
prior coursework, where they learned the content
related to their study and the research skills they
are developing to execute their data collection and
write the dissertation. Curricula, which facilitate
these connections, such as the week-long residency,
help students transition from their coursework to
the dissertation phase of their program, improving
the likelihood of their persistence (Jimenez, 2011).
Finally, an opportunity for students to interact
with their cohorts and faculty facilitates social
connectedness to the university, but also fosters the
development of these needed knowledge and skills.
A sense of community and social connectedness is
very important during the dissertation process in
an online university, where students tend to feel
isolated and alone (de Valero, 2001).

the Research Architecture
The mental model presented as the basis for

the students to create the strategic framework for
their research is entitled “The 10 Strategic Points
for Research.” This conceptual framework was
developed to present a simple, mental model of
the 10-key elements of any research design. This

of their interaction, and a set of questions that
help the student ensure the 10 research elements
are aligned. Figure 1 illustrates each of the 10

components of this mental model. It also illustrates

the interactions between the components. Table 1

questions that help to ensure the alignment of the
various components. Although the table describes
what appears to be a simple set of sequential steps
to develop each of the components. In the end,
this process is iterative throughout the residency
program and in future courses, where students

their dissertation research.

Table 1: Ten-point strategic framework components and alignment questions

The purpose of this study was to determine
student perceptions of the learning they gained
from the use of a 10-point strategic research
framework within the context of a weeklong
residency program. Doctoral students participated
in this residency session with highly trained
residency faculty who are also experienced
dissertation chairs. The residency faculty delivered
research intensive training on conceptualizing,
developing, and writing the required elements of
the 10-point strategic framework. All classroom
sessions were standardized to the extent that
daily content delivery and classroom activities
were similarly structured. The faculty offered
individualized coaching and feedback to students
during daily sessions, and students were expected
to continuously self-evaluate and improve upon the
quality of their work.

Design
A pre-experimental one group, pre-posttest

design was used for this investigation. Doctoral
students completed a draft the 10 strategic points
as an assignment prior to attending their residency

completed a self-evaluation regarding their
understanding of each element of this draft copy of
the 10 strategic points. During the subsequent four
days of intensive research training, which included
faculty led conceptual, visual, and experiential
activities related to developing each element of the
10-points strategic points, students revised their

residency, students presented the culmination of
their work as an oral presentation and completed
the post evaluation assessing their knowledge level
regarding each of the 10 strategic points. The self-
assessment questionnaire was designed as a way for

the week and to develop a plan for the next steps
in developing the framework for their respective
research study.

Procedures
Doctoral students were instructed to use a self-

and post-knowledge of the 10 strategic points. The
Likert scale questionnaire used a data range from
1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neither agree
nor disagree, 4=agree, and 5=strongly agree.

The following questions were posed:

1. I have an understanding of the 10
strategic points.

2. I have an understanding of how to use the

the problem statement for research.
3. I have an understanding of how to use the

literature review to identify a model or
theory to use for my theoretical foundations.

4. I have an understanding of how synthesize
the literature to help develop my 10
strategic points.

5. I have an understanding of how to develop a
problem statement.

6. I have an understanding of how to develop
research questions.

7. I have an understanding of how to develop
a sample.

8. I have an understanding of how to describe
phenomena (qualitative).

9. I have an understanding of how to describe
variables (quantitative).

10. I have an understanding of how to develop
hypotheses (quantitative).

11. I have an understanding of how to select a
methodology (quantitative or qualitative).

12. I have an understanding of how to select
a design.

13. I have an understanding of how to develop a
purpose statement.

14. I have an understanding of how to select
data collection approaches.

15. I have an understanding of the differences
between data analysis for quantitative versus
qualitative methodologies.

Participants
The 10 strategic point self-assessment

questionnaires were analyzed from 135 doctoral
students enrolled in an online Ed.D. doctoral program
at a university located within the southwestern
United States. Doctoral students participate in
face-to-face research residency training during the

of the 10 strategic points as a framework for the
dissertation. As part of the residency experience,

the doctoral students complete a pre- and post-
assessment of their overall learning experience
and understanding of the 10 strategic points. The
self-assessment data were extracted from course

year residency courses during summer 2014. The

removed. Of the 147 questionnaires originally
extracted, 135 questionnaires were complete and

were not collected in this sample. The participants,
all adult learners, were all at a similar level of
coursework in their doctoral program and had

residency course.

Data Analysis
Data analyses were performed treating the data

as nonparametric, based on the self-assessment
questionnaire values rated at the ordinal level

and the dependent nature of the pretest, posttest
scores. A Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test for pair-

differences on self-assessment scores for the 15
questions. A one-tailed test was chosen because
all hypotheses were directional, predicting higher
rankings for the variables entered into the analysis.
The Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test does not assume
normal distribution for the variables of interest;
however, the paired differences are assumed to
be symmetrically distributed. All statistical tests

In effort to reduce the chance of a Type I error, a
Bonferroni correction (Armstrong, 2014) was made
to adjust for multiple comparisons and account
for the familywise error rate (.05/15=.003). The

individual hypothesis was set at p < .003. Analyses
were carried out using IBM SPSS Statistics 21.

Table 2: Descriptive statistics and frequencies (n=135)

Table 2: Descriptive statistics and frequencies (n=135) Continued

Descriptive statistics for the individual
questions were analyzed non-parametrically.
Median data and frequencies were reported for
pretest and posttest scores. Due to the relatively
large sample size, the Likert scale responses could
approximate scale level data, where mean values
can be reported for descriptive purposes. Table 2
provides a summary of the descriptive statistics
for each question including mean, median,

and frequency of responses for each question
represented as a percentage.

The results of the descriptive statistics indicate
that the mean and median values for each question
increased by at least one point. In addition, the

shift in ratings from the pretest to posttest for

ranking the overall understanding of the 10

agreement (agree+strongly agree) at the pretest and

the remainder of the questions. For the pretest,
the percentage agreement (agree+strongly agree)

These data suggest the students perceived their
overall understanding of the 10 strategic points
and the various elements of the model to be much
higher following the residency experience. These
data are supported by the analysis of the rankings
using the Wilcoxon Signed Ranked test.

Table 3 indicates the number of doctoral students
who gave lower ratings (Negative Ranks) from
pretest to posttest on their understanding of the 10
strategic points, the number of students who gave
higher ratings (Positive Ranks), and the number who
gave equal ratings (Ties). A one-tailed Wilcoxon
Signed Rank Test indicated that for all questions,

understanding of the 10 strategic points compared
to students who perceived their understanding to
have decreased or stayed the same.

Implications
There are a number of factors requiring

universities to continue to identify approaches

effectiveness of their doctoral programs. Attrition

time to complete these programs is lengthy, in
part, due to the lack of preparedness on the part
of the doctoral students (Anderson et al., 2013).
The increased accountability and focus on the
effectiveness of doctoral programs (Anderson et
al., 2013) require continued improvement in the
programs not only from an academic perspective,
but also from the student perspective. Part of
improving university programs involves providing
appropriate learner-centered pedagogy to develop
needed research and writing skills (Wagner et
al., 2011). The results of this study suggested that
doctoral students perceived their understanding of
the foundational elements of a dissertation to have
increased as a result of the conceptual, visual,

Table 3: Student rankings for elements of 10 strategic points

and experiential activities related to developing
each element of the 10 strategic points during
the residency experience. Therefore, this type of
instruction offered in the context of a doctoral
residency program may be one strategy that can

student learning and doctoral programs
There are many different factors to consider

when designing doctoral programs (Jones,
2013). One approach is to ensure the programs
are systematically developed, as structured and
systematic instruction offers students a clear path
to both course and degree completion (Anderson et
al., 2013). In light of the structure of the residency
program presented in this study, student learning
may increase when the curriculum is well thought
out, and provides both experiential and social
learning opportunities, as well as time for self-
assessment. Providing a clear set of objectives as
well as mental models used throughout the program
can contribute to this systematic approach. The
10-point strategic framework provides a mental
model or strategic framework for doctoral students
to use when developing the approach to their
dissertation research.

Another area to consider in doctoral programs
is to ensure that socialization, including adapting
the values, knowledge, and capabilities of doing
academic research, occurs. Enabling the students to
address various innate psychological needs, such as
autonomy and a sense of relatedness, may provide
the motivation needed for student success (Mason,

students the opportunity to assess the effectiveness
of their learning, which was offered during this
weeklong course. At the same time, there is still
an opportunity to identify additional approaches
to further increase student understanding of the
dissertation and research process.

The residency classroom environment allowed
the students to work autonomously on their own
dissertations and at the same time receive coaching
from highly experienced and successful chairs may
have contributed to this socialization. Universities
are providing additional focus on developing the
research skills and the pedagogy to address this
need (Wagner et al., 2011).

The dissertation phase of the doctoral program
can be very challenging to students due to its unique

nature. Students need to put in an extraordinary
amount of effort if they are to persist and graduate
(Lindsay, 2015). The residency program design
included the 10-point strategic framework as a mental
model and a tool to enable them to successfully
develop and align the 10 strategic points that would
provide a plan, and a vision, for their dissertation
research. The integration of the 10-point strategic
framework, coaching by experienced, successful
chairs, and the autonomy within the class to work
on their own dissertations was structured to enable
the cognitive and social development for successful
completion of their dissertation.

Limitations
There were a number of limitations to this

research. The research was limited to obtaining
the students’ perceptions of their learning. The
research did not include the actual assessment
of student capability to produce the 10 strategic
points for their dissertation prior to and after the
program. This study involved the use of assessment

in this study were located in one city. Conducting
the assessment in other cities with a more diverse
population will help to extend the generalizability

reasoning as well as the realization of socialization
to the culture of research was not a part of the
formal assessment.

Recommendations
The research conducted on this residency

program was only a beginning step in the process
of designing and assessing this program. This
type of research, where students assess their own
level of learning and development, can directly
contribute not only to making the program more

identify ways to realize continued improvement
in the satisfaction of these students in terms of
their learning, which should lead to increased
persistence as more students have the capability to
complete their dissertation. This research should
continue with the intent to continue to improve
this program.

perceptions of their learning as a result of the
program. However, it did not identify if that

development of the 10 strategic points plan for their

research. Conduct additional research to assess the
students’ ability to create the 10 strategic points
plan for their dissertation before and after the
program. This additional research would assess the
plan students create in a pre-course assignment and
the plan they create during this residency program.

The program design had the intention of enabling
the socialization of the students to the culture of
academic and profession research. However, this
research did not directly the attainment of these
goals. Adding questions to assess the attainment
of their design goals would expand this research

researchers in areas such as socialization.
Other universities who have developed

conceptual frameworks or mental models could
do similar research. These universities could
not only share these models but also research
their effectiveness at various levels. Conduct this
assessment at the knowledge, skill, and application
levels. Moreover, students can be engaged in this
process to ensure their opinions are included to
enable increased student satisfaction and persistence.

Universities are identifying different
approaches to improving the effectiveness and

changes are important in increasing the graduation
rates and reducing the time it takes a student to
complete a doctorate. Changes are being made to
the doctoral curriculum that focuses on more than
just knowledge acquisition. Challenges include
improving student research skills as well as
socialization to the culture of research within their

to address these challenges. This study reports
both the approach used in a doctoral residency
program as well as the doctoral student perceptions
regarding learning acquired during this weeklong
residency program. They were exposed to a
learning environment that included (1) a strategic
framework designed to conceptualize the design for
their dissertation study, and (2) experienced chairs
providing coaching and helped socialize them to
the academic research approach and culture.

During the residency, students use a strategic
10-point process, founded on theories and models

develop a conceptual understanding and blueprint

for their research. The 10-point model provides
a multi-faceted approach to enabling doctoral
students to conceptualize the design for their own
doctoral dissertation working with an environment
that supports cognitive and social development.
The intent of this approach to learning is to provide
students with a model and faculty feedback to create
an aligned research study, thus, enabling students
to design and conduct research and complete both
their dissertations and the online doctoral program
in a timely fashion.

Using a simple quantitative, pre-experimental,
one group pre-posttest, design, students responded
to a questionnaire regarding their understanding
of the 10 required components of the study on

Data were analyzed using Wilcoxen Signed Rank

improvement in student self-reported learning and
understanding of the 10-point strategic framework
model between the pre-post test results.

Opportunities remain to assess the effectiveness
of this approach in terms of the actual improvement
in the student’s ability to apply this model to

study to understand, from the student and faculty
perspective, the factors that contribute to the success
of this program as well needed improvements can

programs in doctoral programs. At the same time
having various universities identify and assess

to develop and execute a plan for their dissertation
research will help to address the challenges faced by
doctoral programs and improve their effectiveness

Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal
of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1-18.

Anderson, B., Cutright, M., & Anderson, S. (2013). Academic
involvement in doctoral education: Predictive value of
faculty mentorship and intellectual community on doctoral
education outcomes. International Journal of Doctoral
Studies, 8, 195-201.

Armstrong, R. A. (2014). When to use the Bonferroni Correction.
Opthalmic Physiological Optics, 34, 502-508.

Brew, A. (2003), Teaching and research: New relationships and
their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning
in higher education. Higher Education Research and
Development, 22(1), 3-18.

de Valero, F. Y. (2001). Departmental factors affecting time-to-
degree and completion rates of doctoral students at one land-
grant research institution. The Journal of Higher Education,
72(3), 341-367.

Glenberg, A. M., & Langston, W. E. (1992). Comprehension of
illustrated text: Pictures help to build mental models. Journal
of memory and Language, 31(2), 129-151.

Ivankova, N. V., & Stick, S. L. (2007). Students’ persistence in a
distributed doctoral program in educa-tional leadership in
higher education: A mixed methods study. Research in Higher
Education, 48(1), 93-135. doi:10.1007/s11162-006-9025-4

Jimenez, C. (2011). Predictors of well-being and depression among
Latino college students. Ph.D. dissertation, University of
Houston, United States-Texas. Retrieved from Dissertations &
Theses: Full Text (Publication No. AAT 3485056).

Jones, M. (2013). Issues in doctoral studies—forty years of journal …