The framework of a generic DProf programme – a reflection on its design, the relational dimension for candidates and advisers and the potential for knowledge co-creation
Fillery-Travis, Annette (2014) The framework of a generic DProf programme – a reflection on its design, the relational dimension for candidates and advisers and the potential for knowledge co-creation. Studies in Higher Education, 39 (4). pp. 608-620. ISSN 0307-5079
PDF (Pre-print version; in-text references incomplete)
- First submitted uncorrected version (with author's formatting)
This paper critically engages with the pedagogical design of a generic professional doctorate programme as a framework for creation of actionable knowledge within the practice of both adviser and candidate. Within this exploration the relational dimensions of the adviser–candidate interaction are identified and their potential impact partially explored.
The professional doctorate at University X has developed over the last 20 years with over 100 candidates either graduated or currently studying. It is an individually negotiated programme where the primary resource for the candidate is the one-to-one support of the academic adviser and the consultant. Within this paper the essential features of the work-based learning programme are described. These are designed to enable individual change and to provide high-level professional development for advanced practitioners. The passionate and creative stance of the advanced practitioners that engage with the programme is then considered, as is the manner in which their practice is knowledge producing and validating in its own right, enabling it to be described as epistemic. The engagement of these practitioners with research and enquiry is considered and specifically the relational aspects of both the focus of the research and the interaction with the supervisory team.
Finally, the professional doctorate is considered in light of whether it is a vehicle for co-creation of actionable knowledge as defined by Antonacopoulou. The result is not straightforward and requires a consideration of both the power distribution within, and leadership of, the research activity. Specifically, the challenges that the advisory team are confronted with identifies that is it as much a process of individual change for them as for their candidates.
|Additional Information:||Published online: 08 Oct 2012|
|Keywords (uncontrolled):||Professional doctorate; knowledge co-creation; practitioner research; relational dimension|
|Research Areas:||A. > Institute for Work Based Learning|
|Depositing User:||Annette Fillery-Travis|
|Date Deposited:||15 Mar 2012 11:39|
|Last Modified:||16 Jul 2015 13:19|
Actions (login required)