The design of self-directed learning-processes of doctoral candidates: A qualitative, comparative analysis of qualification processes in educational science
Author(s):
Eva Kubsch (presenting / submitting)
Conference:
ECER 2014
Network:
21. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Format:
Paper

Session Information

ERG SES G10, Post-Graduate Education

Paper Session

Time:
2014-09-02
09:00-10:30
Room:
FPCEUP - 249
Chair:
Henrique Vaz

Contribution

Particularly the Bologna-Process has aroused discussions about how the structure of the PhD-qualification should be improved in order to reduce the duration of this learning process (graduate earlier), improve the support of doctoral candidates and enable the candidates to become more self-consistent and self-dependent PhD-students. Therefore, several surveys have been realized taking the conditions of the doctoral path into focus (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 2008; 2013; Jaksztat, Briedis April 2009; Fabian, Briedis 2009). Nevertheless, it remains to be asked how PhD-students deal with certain conditions over time, understanding the configuration of the doctoral path as a learning process.

In order to discover tools, coping strategies and to find out what becomes a “learning object” over time, ten qualitative interviews have been carried out with doctoral candidates of educational science at three different points of time (longitudinal study). Altogether, there are 30 qualitative interviews that are being analyzed using the grounded theory by Strauss/Corbin (1996). The period of time within which the interviews were carried out was 18-24 months - looking at the initial phase of the qualification process.  

In order to take the perspective of doctoral advisors into account and using this perspective also as a basis for interpretation, a group discussion/focus group is planned. 

Method

Methodology and research questions: The main research question is: What features of self-directed learning (taking the levels and dimensions of self-directed learning by Faulstich 1999 into consideration) appear in the surveyed qualification processes? Beyond that, the question is: Is there a discrepancy between the expectations that the doctoral candidates have - concerning the support doctoral advisors should offer - and the perspective of doctoral advisors to this issue? The function of the last question is to include both perspectives of the main actors that are involved into these kinds of qualification processes. Theoretical Background: The theoretical background is based on Klaus Holzkamp’s “subject-science of learning”, which focusses on the relation of meanings and reasons of actions that individuals fulfill. The approach distinguishes two types of learning-actions: expansive and defensive learning. Which of either type is realized depends on the reasons that lie behind the learning-action (Holzkamp 1995).

Expected Outcomes

The theoretical background by Klaus Holzkamp is supposed to help work out individual reason-meaning-relations. These explain why the interviewees design their doctoral path as they do, looking at their actions that can be arranged on a continuum with the two poles self-government and heteronomy. The question is: Where on this continuum can the doctoral candidates’ actions be situated and why?

References

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (2008): Bundesbericht zur Förderung des Wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchses (BuWiN). Bonn/Berlin. Burkhardt, Anke (2013): Bundesbericht wissenschaftlicher Nachwuchs 2013. Statistische Daten und Forschungsbefunde zu Promovierenden und Promovierten in Deutschland. Bielefeld: WBV. Fabian, Gregor; Briedis, Kolja (2009): Aufgestiegen und erfolgreich. Ergbnisse der dritten HIS-Absolventenbefragung des Jahres 1997 zehn Jahre nach dem Examen. HIS. Hannover. Faulstich, Peter (1999): Einige Grundfragen zur Diskussion um "selbstgesteuertes Lernen". In: Stephan Dietrich und Elisabeth Fuchs-Brüninghoff (Hg.): Selbstgesteuertes Lernen - auf dem Weg zu einer neuen Lernkultur, Bd. 18. Frankfurt/M: DIE (DIE / Deutsches Institut für Erwachsenenbildung (DIE), Pädagogische Arbeitsstelle des Deutschen Volkshochschul-Verbandes. Materialien für Erwachsenenbildung, 18), S. 24–39. Holzkamp, Klaus (1995): Lernen. Subjektwissenschaftliche Grundlegung. Frankfurt am Main, New York: Campus. Jaksztat, Steffen; Briedis, Kolja (2009): Studienstrukturreform und berufliche Situation aus Sicht des wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchses. Ergebnisse der ersten WiNbus-Befragung. HIS. Strauss, Anselm L.; Corbin, Juliet M. (1996): Grounded theory. Grundlagen qualitativer Sozialforschung. Weinheim: Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion.

Author Information

Eva Kubsch (presenting / submitting)
Universität Hamburg
Frankfurt am Main

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.