Learning while Working

Facilitating part-time PhD fellows

e-Learning Symposium, October 2010
Martin Rehm
Dual Career PhD Programme in Governance and Policy
Analysis (GPAC)

Working Professionals writing

(part-time) their PhD (n = 22)

• International

• Diverse Background

• (Very) Experienced

Participants’ Goal

”Synthesize past practical

experience within a structured and
theoretical framework”
 r s
to GP
na A
di Ce
o or rs
C
SurfGroepen
Online Courses
Feedback

Facilitators
Online (Remedial) Courses

• Collaborative (Community of Learning)

– Governance
– Political Science

• Self-Guided (Assignments)
– Maths & Stats
Feedback

• Webconferencing
– Screensharing
– “One-on-One” Coordinator – GPACer
• Posting proposals

Discussing / sharing progress

– General
– PhD proposal
Outcomes (1st Run)
 Participants’ Impressions

• “Choice of articles was very good and

provided a comprehensive overview of
current topics and issues”

• Participants appreciated the possibility to

engage into discussions with peers

• “Posting proposals was useful” see how

other’s did it
Governance: Active Participants
100

90

80
Active Participants (%)

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2

M1 M2 M3 M4
Maths / Stats: Active Participants

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%
Inactive
50%
Active
40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Participation
Expectations (before the start)
Question M SD

This team believes it can become exceptionally good. 6.00 0.76

This team expects to be known as a highly performing group. 5.75 1.04

I would want to work with this team in the future. 5.75 1.04

In this team I will share all relevant information and ideas I have. 5.63 1.19

I expect team members to carefully listen to each other. 5.50 1.20

I expect that comments on ideas are acted upon. 5.38 1.19

As a team we will learn a lot. 5.38 0.52

I expect it to be difficult to ask other members of this team for
help. 2.50 0.76
Likert Scale (1: completely disagree - 7: completely agree)
“Nobody else [except the
facilitators] seemed to start a
discussion, so I also did not
feel the need to start off”
Feedback
Computer says no
…
Changes & Adjustments
• [Further] minimize obligatory readings (only one
academic paper per week)

• Improve practical case examples linking the

theory/evidence learned from the course materials

• Refine the narrative of the problem statements from

“neutral” to “your problem”

• No generic literature, but rather applied research papers

• Combining GPACers with incoming (full-time) PhD

fellows (n = 12)

• Simplifying the layout of the online platform

Outcomes (2nd Run)
 Facilitators’ Impressions

• participants do not illustrate their ideas with examples from

their own countries or working experiences discussions
remained mostly in an abstract academic way
• some participants left the discussions when others with more
comprehensive analyses entered
• participants read and found useful the material for their own
purposes, but decided not to join the discussions
• user-friendliness of the chosen platform might not have been
high enough
• the courses turned out to be very useful for those participants
who were specializing in topics related to the course contents.
 r s GP
to
na A Ce
r di rs
o
Co
Blackboard Mentoring
Learn+ System

Collaboration “Guide-on-the-Side”

Mentors
Learning while Working
Facilitating part-time PhD fellows
e-Learning Symposium, October 2010
Martin Rehm