1. A two year journey to building the ACCESS Community Advancing Community, Critical Thought, Engagement, Scholarship, and Success

2. Introduction

3. ACCESS Presenters

4. Overview

5. School of Advanced Studies Our purpose is to prepare leaders who put scholarship to work as they improve their communities and build a legacy of learning. Our vision is to be recognized by peers, students, and employers as the school of choice for working professionals to earn a practitioner doctoral degree. Our mission is to develop scholar-practitioner-leaders who conduct research as a foundation for creative action to influence policy and guide diverse organizations through effective decision-making.

6. Essential Questions Early 2012: Jeremy Moreland, Academic Dean of SAS asks “How can we get more active inquiry that produces higher quality research and dissertations?” “How can we engage and retain our entering doctoral students?”

7. SAS Change Imperative  To produce agile, innovative scholar /practitioner / leaders who co-create original, innovative dissertations (by creating / testing theory )  To do so – we need to understand the critical role of theorizing in active inquiry throughout the student experience (including the dissertation process) 7

8. The ACCESS Story

9. So what is the role of theorizing in active inquiry? Theory cannot be improved until we improve the theorizing process and we cannot improve the theorizing process until we describe it more explicitly, operate it more self-consciously, and de- couple it (discovery) from validation more deliberately (Weick, 1989, p.1) Johnston & Kortens, 2013 9

10. De-coupling Discovery from Validation Discovery Validation Exploring alternatives What if questions Thought Experiments Sense Making Model building Use of metaphor Confirmations Replication Verification Consistency Reducing Bias Proof 10

11. What would we see if the (SAS) system was designed to emphasize Validation? ElementFormProduces a student experience of: CurriculumRigid, centralized/content driven/ activity bound, Inflexible learning, limited application Trivial theories, undifferentiated dissertations, replicating past designs Faculty Pedagogy Support all assertionsPassive stance, reduced opportunity to engage in critical thinking Predominant Logic Deductivepremature closure of inquiry / creativity Program structure Tight, fixed, linearAnxiety, rush to completion 11

12. What would we see if the (SAS) system was designed to emphasize Discovery? ElementFormProduces a student experience of: CurriculumIndividualizedA genius of their own InstructionDifferentiated instruction Higher achievement Faculty discourseWhat other angles might you consider? Support for Critical Thinking Predominant LogicInductive / AbductiveEpistemic Agility Program structureIterativeContinuous improvement 12

13. Critical Reading and Writing 3 Weeks Critical Thinking and Leadership 8 Weeks Critical and Creative Thinking Residency 5 Days Introduction to Research 8 weeks Portfolio and CWE workshops Critical Reading and Writing 3 Weeks Critical Thinking and Leadership 8 Weeks Critical and Creative Thinking Residency 5 Days Introduction to Research 8 weeks

15. Curriculum Model Analysis Synthesis Evaluation Ideate Empathy Critical Thinking Design Thinking Context

16. Concluding Questions How can we get a more appropriate mix of discovery and validation across all of our programs? How can our assessment model and activities support discovery?

17. Speaker Information Elizabeth Johnston, Ed.D, ljohnston@email.phoenix.edu Anthony Kortens, PhD AnthonyK0203@email.phoenix.edu Shawn Boone Shawn.Boone@phoenix.edu

18. Reference slides ­ Additional slides if needed for illustration

19. A Mixed Epistemological Approach Social ConstructionismPositivist (+ post- positivist) Main BenefitEnables innovationEnables standardization Learning ModelSituated LearningCognitive model Learning EmphasisActive, collaborativeIndependent, passive VoiceDialogicMonologic Point of focusDiscovery processValidating the product Result of Over-emphasisOver-abstractionTriviality

20. Improving theorizing could afford us … More original scholarly achievements/ contributions by students & faculty Alignment with peer accreditation Active/engaged inquiry by student and faculty body Increased generative capacity for the entire system Increased Credibility and competitive posture of SAS Students more agile better prepared for societal impact and excellence in a competitive global environment Achieving the SAS Mission Johnston & Kortens, 2013 20

21. Working with visuals

22. Core Findings: Curriculum