I thoroughly enjoyed reading how this study related to or were similar to the concepts found in emotional intelligence.  I believe that this particular area has a huge impact on all areas of learning and you have done a great job of giving a comparison as well as describing the perceived outcome of what the doctoral student is learning as a result of this process.  Keep up the great efforts. 

I enjoyed reading the study and found it interesting. From what I gather, the study was based on interviews from one university. It would be interesting to see if another set of students from a different university with the same number of students and years, how that set of data would compare. I would also suggest the type of programs the students are registered, which could lead to other findings based on type of program. Then you could compare programs between schools to further expand points and data.

Very interesting study and outcome of data. Thank you.

This is a very interesting and straightforward study that supports some anecdotal data that I have informally gathered over the years. For me, from a high-level perspective, this innovative and unique stakeholder-centric focus is one of the most memorable aspects of this research. Without doubt, this learner focus is very much different from many traditional institutions - including the one from which I earned my doctorate degree. As a scholar-practitioner, it might be very interesting, and likely of high utility, to research the intersection of doctoral learners' perceptions of cognitive and behavioral outcomes, and those of the stakeholders of the workplaces in which they operate. Where are the disconnects? Where are the parallels? As doctoral learners emerge and transform their organizations, this interface, without doubt, will be very relevant in many aspects of their work.

 Daniel J. Smith, MA, MBA, PhD

This was a very interesting study. Upon initial read, I found myself wondering what the characteristics of a nontraditional, doctoral program would entail as opposed to a traditional program. Does this mean that the program is offered online or in a blended format, or does it mean that the program has a specific curriculum that differentiates it from others? The results were intriguing. One thing that was an "aha" to me was that the cognitive and behavioral categories overlapped and that critical thinking was one of the most pronounced. Did the students define what they meant by critical thinking? Another question I had was what some of the "outliers" or items that fell into the "other" category were.......

It is great to see all of the discussion about this study. I will take this opportunity to answer a few qustions. In the doctoral program, which we studied, the delivery is onine with residency requirements.  The students were surveyed during residency. Students did not define the categories, but wrote their own responses. A majority of the responses recorded were specifically critical thinking, but there were a few others, which we thought fit into this category, including open-mindedness, reflection, global thinking, synthesis, and objectivity, to name a few. For the outliers, we were very careful not to force anything into a category if it didn't quite fit. For the cognitive data set, we saw things such as diversity, purpose, and vision. In the behavioral data set we saw honesty, integrity, and values. We are aware that more research needs to be done. I welcome Hank and Ted to share as well. Thank you for the interest in our study!

Rick Holbeck

Rick thanks for the good explanations on the coding and operational definitions rational.

Also, as far as characteristics of non-traditional doctoral programs are concerned, these would include a few distinctions from traditional programs. First, the student population is different. In non-traditional programs students are more likely to be working adults and thus not full-time students in the traditional sense. Also, there is some evidence, as mentioned in the paper, that nontraditional students are more diverse.

Next, nontraditional doctoral programs often deliver their course content in more flexible ways. This often includes online modalities as well as face to face residency sessions conducted throughout the academic year. Further, content may be delivered through asynchronous or multiple session synchronous formats. In this way nontraditional programs defy the archetypal programs by becoming increasingly student centric.

As I read the paper, I realized that you found a way to survey the GCU learners in an informal setting. You will be able to use the information gathered and analyzed to improve the program. In several of my classes, the learners have commented on the value of the residencies and how they have seen how GCU staff has responded to their comments and suggestions. I think your future research will enable further improvements.

This submission was an interesting read!  When/if I pursue a doctorate, it will be through the online learning process.  As with all online learning processes, I believe we run the risk of having learners report/provide information they suspect we wish to hear.  In the case of this data gathered, learners appeared to have been candid in their presentation of information. 

It is good as well as important that this study sought to gauge the impact on personal/professional behaviors because of the learning.  I believe reflection is an important part of the learning process.  Reflecting with others has a higher value as the thoughts, actions, and opinions of others further shape our thinking.  Cohorts provide this venue for learning.  While online learning may be lonely, working within a cohort provides support and encouragement.  Such settings should shape the diverse roles for learning that each doctoral student should fine-tune and develop to be effective as a leader in his/her field of study. 

Therefore, with nontraditional learning environments, I suspect the absence of cohort learning or in GCU; language (CLC) structures would yield different results.  Iron sharpens iron!  The effectiveness and learning curve of doctoral students may be a reflection of how they performed within the group and heavily weigh upon the role the learner assumes within the group.

Rae Thompson

Good points on the stigmas attached to non-traditional learning. I have found through research and reading, even through Chronicles of Higher Education and other leading journals these are perpetuated-especially amongst the ground based universities. Working online- it is a platform and medium, much like technology I have found myself defending. As I read this paper I am left with a correlation and wondering, if the high rate of non-traditional learners entering being female this might impact the negative view of online learning? The ground based learning, which the courses are most often derived from, and quite often course writer hail, even students blend learning with both versions- still according to this research; ground leaning tends to be more male. Interesting concept. It is not the technology aspect, as technology fields in the United States are high paid profession, in contrast to female dominated professions where pay is lower. In contrast with both personally and professionally, students online I have found tend to find faculty more accessible. I am interested in your outcomes. This is an interesting study. This was a large internal debate at the University campus here in Colorado for the past several years. Always the same outcome.

You are right on the different perception of the online learner versus the ground campus doctoral student. I could see this study going into the field of analyzing the difference between how traditional ground doctoral students feel about their behavioral and cognitive growth from their doctoral program compares to those that are in an online program. It would be interesting to see how they see themselves versus the non traditonal doctoral student.

As a Year3 doctoral student (with another institution), I found your study quite relevant. Have you considered comparing the responses with your control group (non-traditional hybrid) with non-traditional online doctoral learners using yearly residencies? Or, do you consider them the same? Are there similar studies with non-traditional doctoral learners? Reflecting on the previous doctoral coursework as I prepare my dissertation, I relate to your questions. I was curious how prospective employers view the competency of the doctorate holder. I rate time management and perservence similar to your respondents; is this the same for the full time student? Another question to explore is how much your respondents vary  from traditional doctoral learners. Thank you for sharing.

Note: there are several spacing issues in this report, such as the first sentence.

Barbara,

Thanks for your questions. In this case we are using "non-traditional" to cover those programs that are not the standard "in residence" programs. I think that comparing perceptions of nontraditional hybrid students to night ground students may be useful.