Tips for a PhD defense or viva #phd

It is with quite some pleasure that I was awarded the PhD in Educational Technologies last week.

The UK version of a PhD defense is called a Viva, which resembles a closed oral examination (open book) with one external examiner (connected to another University than the one you are at) and an internal examiner (affiliated to your own University, but with whom nor yourself, nor your supervisors have co-authored a paper – so not closely professionally related). In addition to that, you have one observer (normally that is one of your supervisors, she or he will take notes on what is said, and possible recommendations) and a chair (Doug Clow, who explains all the details of the viva and who sees to it that everyone stays hydrated and in an objective state of mind). In my case the external examiner was Neil Morris (Leeds University), the internal examiner was Allison Littlejohn (The Open University, UK). The external examiner usually leads the questioning, which was also the case in my viva. Btw the central question to my PhD thesis was 'what characterizes the informal, self-directed learning of experienced adult, online learners engaged in individual or social learning using any device to follow a FutureLearn MOOC'. It resulted in a conceptual framework for informal self-directed learning, using a method that provided the voices (experiences) of the learners to come through, as such providing a theory from the ground up (in most cases a framework starts from theory, providing a top down dynamic to come to the conclusions). A draft version of the thesis can be read here. The picture shows my two supervisors (Mike Sharples and Agnes Kukulska-Hulme) and Rebecca Ferguson (who was kind enough to be my main examiner during the mock viva) and my wonderful colleagues Janesh Sanzgiri, Jenna Mittelmeier and Garron Hilaire.

The questions started off mildly (with a fair question, which aims at making you feel comfortable, so along the lines of: briefly describe your research, why were you interested in the topic you investigated). From there the questions tend to become more complex and they tend to demand a more in-depth answer. Normally the questions will start at the beginning of your thesis, and consist of overall (e.g. how did you select your literature) as well as very detailed questions (why did you select only that fragment here) which the examiner found either of interest, confusing, or lacking. This means you really need to understand why you did what you did, throughout your thesis.

These are some of the questions I got, with some additional information:  

• How do your research questions follow from your literature review? During preparation I linked all of my research questions to the most influential paper I mentioned in my literature review. This is also handy for other literature related questions, as you memorise core papers and their subsequent authors.

• Which element of your findings gave rise to the most poignant discussion; and can you list the main authors for that discussion reflecting on that part of your findings? Why did you limit yourself to these authors for the discussion on that part of X findings? I can tell you, this was a tough question. It means you relate the literature of your literature review and use some of those papers to fuel the scientific discussions on your findings taking into account what the literature already pointed to, as opposed to what your findings show to be different (or similar, as you will most likely find that your findings have commonalities as well as differences with prior research).   

• What is the relation between the research of your pilot study and the main study? In my case the pilot study had different research questions (and sub-questions) than the main study, this had to be explained, and this had an effect on the findings. This change resulted from the qualitative, exploratory starting point of my study, and the resulting findings from the pilot which urged me to rephrase the research questions of my main study a bit.

• Is there a theory runs through your investigation, and has an effect on the literature you choose to focus on, the methodology, and research instruments? In my case that was socio-constructivism, briefly: one of the theories I used (connected to the pedagogical design of FutureLearn) is Laurillards conversational framework, specifically the informal conversational framework, which is related to the socio-constructivist view of the world. Additionally, I choose to use Charmaz’s constructing Grounded Theory approach, which also is deeply embedded in the socio-constructivist heritage, and I used multiple learner voices to look at emerging codes, categories and concepts coming from multiple viewpoints (as I used multiple data sources provided to me over time by the participants in my study – participants were asked to self-report their learning through learning logs, sent at different moments throughout their learning experience with FutureLearn MOOCs.

• Questions could also be limited in scope, for instance: what is your definition of socio-constructivism? Prepare core definitions that are key to your thesis.

• How did your research questions guide your coding? Tough one, as there is a tension between qualitative research which starts from the concept of no-assumption, to research questions inevitably guiding codes (e.g. codes related to the sub-question of technology for learning).

• Or considering one area of my findings: what type of definition are you using for social learning? And how does it differ from other social learning definitions? In my case, I used social learning as it is defined by Laurillard, which fits FutureLearn, and is based on the notion of Socratic dialogue, which means it involves at least two active people. This stands in contrast with for instance Bandura (who goes back to a behaviorist view as well, as Bandura’s definition of social learning can be traced back to Pavlov), where Bandura also sees passive learning (e.g. lurking) also as a form of social learning, as it is still embedded in a the whole of society as the learning environment and is part of observing.

• Two difficult questions were raised during my mock viva. A mock viva is a sort of general rehearsal for your viva. It usually involves your supervisors, as well as a colleague who wishes you well and wants to strengthen your viva skills. In my case, I head the pleasure of having Rebecca Ferguson as my mock viva examiner and she is fabulous! I also used some of her tips in preparation for the mock viva, have a look at the top 40 viva questions she listed as important here. One of the questions she asked me was: what is the difference between MOOC learning and other online learning? E.g. active presence of a facilitator, scale, length of course versus length of curriculum, prerequisites, compulsory or not. Another difficult question was: why did not you taken into account the MOOC educators? Where the better answer would have been: I did take them into account educators, but only in the roles in which they were seen by the learners, not in their classical roles as defined by educational institutes.

Some general remarks:

Make sure you know your thesis, and use parts of it when looking for answers to the questions you are getting. I mean, physically point to your thesis, this will buy you some time to find the right answer, and will give you some additional content support.

Look confident and be succinct. This gives the idea of professionalism to your person, a research professionalism. It does not matter if you belief it, just know that you are indeed the expert on that topic, so you can and must be confident.

The questions you get can come from a variety of thoughts: interest in the approach, doubt on what you wrote, or simple trickery to see whether you do really understand what you are doing. This means that at times you might here a question, which prompts an internal voice to say “Hey! But I did do that, or I do have an argument for doing it that way!”, in that case voice your answer and do not be afraid to stick with your thesis, or correct the examiners. Of course, it is essential to always stay polite, also when you are entering a discussion. But really, the examiners are there to strengthen your thesis, so they are in a way trying to let you grasp how you can make your thesis even stronger, and you are the one who is the real expert in what you have investigated, you know the processes you used to get to your main conclusions.

Academic job applications lessons learned... so far #phd #job

Once a PhD is almost finalized (I am having my PhD defense on Thursday 12 January 2017), the next challenge is finding a new job. Finding a new profession is always a challenge, but... it turns out that I was not that well prepared and I did not know some of the basic steps towards becoming a serious researcher. So, I thought that I would add to the previous PhD posts and accompanying slides (on Life as a PhD student and Is there life post PhD?).

Some elements are easily adaptable for future job applications, and other actions should have been undertaken early in the PhD journey. I learned to mention my experiences explicitly, to read the job applications 10 times over (as well as the information page of the related departments), to illustrate funding explicitly, and highlight teaching experiences. I did ask a Human Resource expert to have a look at my academic resume/CV from the HR point of view, and that improved the overall look of it. But admittedly, no one else but me knows what I actually did, so I had to learn to make my academic leadership/research/philosophy explicit, while staying true to myself (this last element can have a huge effect by the way).
On the other hand, there are some facts that are unavoidably part of the process of becoming a serious researcher, and it seems that I have to find and accept those rules. Here is what I learned so far, all mixed with some personal reflections on each step (reflections of someone who still has to learn the ropes despite (or because of) her age. If you know other points of attention, feel free to share, I still have a lot to learn, I am sure.

What accounts as scientific output: choose high impact journals to publish your research
However much you might be critical of the self-sustaining closed research publishing cycle... it has no use to solely publish in open access journals if you want to be seen as a high class researcher. Publishing in what is called A1 (or high impact) journals is inevitable if you want to be seen as a strong researcher. Even if you have a high h-index and accompanying citations, it just is not valued as strongly as the sometimes less-cited A1 journals.
There is a good, longstanding article on the debate of 'Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research' comes from Per O Seglen which goes back to 1997, a more recent article published in Nature written by Ewen Callaway on some of the publishing elite turning its back on the impact factor. And there is of course the risk of being trapped by predatory open access publishers, which needs to be avoided by all of us.

Research versus practice oriented work
Another distinction is made between research articles and practice work and articles. To me writing practice oriented articles increases the public awareness of evidence-based research implementation. I also really like to put theory to practice (what works on paper and in life... is real evidence-based, right?). But, it can be used against you when your profile is compared to others who publish research articles solely, or only work on theoretical research. So, if you want to be considered as a serious researcher, collaborate with other high impact researchers and institutes to built your strong research profile.
This also means to use highly visible (and generally accepted) theoretical frameworks or theoretical grounding for any application which involves research. Share ready-to-be-used research instruments, based on theoretical sound frameworks. This is part of making your assumptions and expertise visible, if you have theoretical knowledge and you are planning to use it, than make those theoretical groundings shine like really bright stars in order to look as serious as the serious investigator you are.
On the other hand, look for practice oriented postdocs if you like putting theory to practice .

Making research assumptions visible
To me, it is very logical what I did professionally, but that is not the case with others reading my resume/CV. This is true from a theoretical research perspective, and from a practical perspective. A sentence like "I developed and rolled out multiple elearning solutions" covers what I did in terms of developing Technology Enhanced Learning tools and instruments. It turned out that such sentences simply get blurred if they are in the middle of a cv. Those types of sentences do not ring any bells, so they do not trigger the brain of whomever is reading the resume. I found that out the hard way, from feedback indicating that the person who was accepted had more experience with authoring tools and virtual learning environments ... I have used multiple authoring tools, each to build online learning that was meaningful for its context, delivery and target population, ... so that made me think about what I had mentioned in my resume, and what was actually understood by it. So, now I adapted my resume, and added a brief list of examples after the sentence: built content using authoring tools, increased social learning experiences by implementing a diverse social learning palet (cohort learning, jigsaw approach), linked indicators to meaningful learning analytics, engaged in expert recording, editing and using mixed media (audio, video, computer assisted animation tools), wrote html5 applications to be used in mobile learning, installed, supported and adapted Moodle for LMS (including basic learning analytics). But these are all very practice oriented deliverable's.

Now, I also understand that if I want to focus on my scientific work, I will have to briefly describe and than possibly offer more detailed accounts of my research work: instruments used, frameworks used, theoretical grounding I am familiar with... Looking as a serious researcher opens the door to becoming (an even more serious) one. Classes I have given (for which levels or groups).
From a personality perspective, listing these accomplishments felt difficult. It felt like bragging (a thing not to be done in my upbringing, but ... very necessary when applying for jobs in competitive fields).

Promote and support your independent research 
From a research perspective, there is a recurring question probing for any independent scientific work you have performed. Again, this is where I used the wrong sort of phrasing: I mentioned my independent scientific work, but I did not specify that it was independent (I set it up, coordinated it, built the instruments and found funding), which made it look like just something I was involved in due to being asked. Okay, I am changing the phrasing on those options as well.
But there is more, if you are writing a research or teaching proposal, make sure you use strong, supported theoretical frameworks for those proposals. Again, show that you know your field-specific research, and that you can use accepted theoretical frameworks as a means for your proposal.
Get affiliated with a major research institute. Not being affiliated with an well-established, recognised research institute might also keep doors closed. So even if you are an independent researcher, try to get a (free, but affiliated) title with one of the major universities. This will help you grow personally, professionally, and will help to open doors in the future.

Built and nurture your professional research network
Even if you cannot sell yourself that well to others you do not know, those researchers who do know you will understand your strengths more easily. This enhances your options of getting a job at their institutions, or

Ask more senior researchers to revue your proposal
Well, this is of course only possible if you write your proposal well in advance, as senior researchers have little spare time. I neglected this option with one of my research proposals, and the feedback made me realize that it could have been stronger, if I had only showed the proposal to more experienced academics in my network and gotten their feedback.

Understanding academic leadership, and making it explicit
Providing a good overview of your academic leadership is very useful. This means that you need to put yourself out there, ready to collaborate with others. Say yes to any research, supervision, funding, teaching opportunities you might be offered or you can attract yourself. This is VERY important. If you support anyone's (research) thesis, whether in a master/PhD track, make note and list it in your resume (preferably with a link to title and person of course).

Language is also a determining factor, being able to communicate in English is quite important in the Northern hemisphere. And although the academic world is seen as being international, you will have to make sure you learn your field-specific jargon and regional focus points (some countries look for international academics, others are more national in their search). And it seems to me that it is better to stay and get a post-doc where you got your PhD, than to immediately go out and move country immediately after having finished your PhD. So, first build up some extra seniority as a researcher.

Personal challenges
Everyone looking for a job has additional personal challenges: for me - or at least how I perceive it - there is my age (admitting that I do have a lot of pre-academic professional experiences). The fact that I come from a background without prior academics (so no common or informal knowledge was passed on). The fact that I belief everyone should be able to have access to any research output (which inevitably brought me to the idea that open journals are always the best choice, which ... they are not if you want to be seen as a serious researcher. My family combination (same sex couple with young child) omits me from some working environments, and omits some professional options.

Of course, these are only small challenges when compared to others in more pressing circumstances, e.g. what to do if you were educated in another country or having had to move from a forced displacement, and your at least one of your degrees is not acknowledged? But for me, it already feels like an uphill battle and sometimes one I had not seen coming.

I will become 50 years old in the year to come, and I must admit I feel a bit beaten by the norm once again. At this point in time it feels like I found my calling too late, or that I am not fully equipped for it, and that the choices made early in life keep weighing on the future steps you take.  

Free bidding for funding seminars for early researchers #PhD #EU #funding

While I am nearing the end of my PhD journey (which is basically: 'type until you drop' and 'what do you mean there is an outside world with real people?'), I am now confronted with: what happens next. I am lucky to have some options (one as a pedagogical adviser which I like), and I also applied for a Marie Curie-Sklodowska fellowship (a highly acclaimed 3 year academic scholarship). But to be honest funding is a main issue for any academic. Which is why I am happy that the KMI (Knowledge Media Institute of The Open University) has made two free webinars available which focus on the act of bidding for funding. Including why you should apply as well as how.

The bidding for funding seminars are aimed at doctoral students as well as early researchers, so an interesting and timely mix. Gladly sharing the description:

"The Bidding for Funding: Opportunities for Students workshop aims to provide an overview of some of the major sources of funding for research and knowledge transfer within UK and EU available to postgraduate research students. It will deal with funding to support their phd projects as well as looking at opportunities to support their research beyond their phd.  Dr Hitesh Patel will provide an overview. The workshop will also provide an opportunity to hear from Dr Sam Eden in the Dept of Physical Sciences, Science Faculty. Dr Eden will share his experience of securing external funding through a range of schemes to develop their academic career. He currently holds an EPSRC Accelerator Fellowship and also had funding from an EU Marie Curie Fellowship. There may also be an opportunity to hear from a PhD student and learn from them about how they have gone about sourcing funding for their phd project. The workshop will cover topics such as:

• OU support for seeking external funding and sourcing funding opportunities
• major sources of UK and EU funding
• submitting proposals
• developing external funding bids – opportunity to look at some successful and unsuccessful proposals and discuss and review these
• questions and answer

Select from replays below to look at the recordings (approx 50 min). 10:00 am Dr Hitesh Patel 11:00 am Dr Sam Eden

Finding jobs as a post-PhD: strategies & opportunities #PhD #research #job

Today Koula  Charitonos and I are sharing some pointers on how to guide your career to where you want to go (as an academic or TELearning professional). The session is part of the valuable CALRG seminars, which are held at the Open University (UK) and are part of academic professional development and reflection. The incomparable Rebecca Ferguson and Liz Fitzgerald drive all the events and make it into an increasing success. 

Below are my slides on getting to the next career move after obtaining a PhD (which admittedly, I am finalizing still) and to find those positions that align with the personal life as well as personal ambition. [After giving my presentation, I got a tweet from Anne Krook who has some amazing links to help post-PhD students to find their next job, either in academia and/or corporate world, so gladly referring to her resources here.]

In running up to this presentation, I also wrote down some steps that makes up a PhD journey for those interested in taking up a PhD challenge and stretch their research horizons with a formal degree. Those PhDjourney slides can be found here (with links to probation reports, an example of a PhD call proposal, etcetera).

Here are the post-PhD career options slides

Moving from PhD to Post-Doc career options from Inge de Waard

Visual self-directed informal learning in FutureLearn MOOC #mooc @futureLearn

Finishing a Phd can be a slow process for some (on the positive side, I have been told by Bart Rienties that it is slower for holistic, creative thinkers as they tend to work in peaks... so with some slack in between). Anyway, I am now on iteration Z of my quest to build a visual to portray the self-directed informal learning as it is described by experienced, adult, online learners engaged in MOOC of the FutureLearn type. The visual is a way to grasp what all the findings mean, how they relate to one another, and how I can structure the findings in a way that enables the reader of my thesis to see where I am going.

The findings of my study were obtained from 52 course participants, involved in 3 FutureLearn courses, filling in Learning logs during their MOOC experience and getting interviewed on specific questions. To analyse the data I used a grounded theory approach, more specifically, I constructed a grounded theory following Charmaz's (2014) latest guidelines and pointers (while adding some of mine as well).

While sifting through the data, I found that the learning ecology of FutureLearn MOOC could be represented in 5 learning elements to embrace the whole online learning ecology: technology, context, learner characteristics, social versus individual learning, and organising learning. Admittedly, any learning could be covered by these 5 learning elements. But when focusing on FutureLearn courses, the data from the experienced, online learners provided some specific actions describing their informal, self-directed learning inside of these courses. This makes it possible to some kind of comparison to self-directed, informal learning in FutureLearn MOOC versus learning in classic online courses.
The information inside of the second circle is related to FutureLearn MOOC, outside of the second circle are some online course elements.

While going through the data numerous times (creating research vertigo in my head), I also got the impression that the key inhibitors or enablers of self-directed, informal learning are: motivation and learning goals. These two elements were most frequently mentioned in active relation to each of the 5 learning elements covering the online learning ecology. Which is why I put motivation and learning goals at the center of the 5 learning elements. The reason why I put them at the center are many, but briefly: if there is no (intrinsic) motivation, the learner does not even start to register in MOOC. Once registered, it is motivation (in most cases intrinsic motivation) which keeps them wanting to learn more (which is not the same as following all the content of the MOOC, but simply absorbing that content which is relevant to the learner). If the learning goal/s are not felt as being benefited by the MOOC, learners stop engaging in the MOOC. The learning goals (which can be professionally or personally driven, or both for those happy with their jobs) are what make learners move above and beyond: they will solve tech problems, they will connect to others, they will overcome lack of confidence, they will organise their learning against any time constraints they encounter.

With this visual drawn... I am going to rewrite findings, and add discussions to get my final chapter ready... that is the plan... yes, plan. *inner voice: "Please brain help this poor lass on getting all the words on paper. Will provide extra chocolate"*. 

6 International Leverhulme #PhD scholarships for Open World Learning

Just received word that there are still open places for the 6 Leverhulme Trust Doctoral Scholarships (£14057 per year) focusing on research related to Open World Learning. These are additional PhD scholarships to the one's I posted last week. Learning in the 21st century is undergoing subtle and radical transformation as a result of the impact of digital, networked technologies. Open learning gives unprecedented access to information and education and provides support to learners across the globe. However, it is not the technologies themselves that represent the biggest change, but the opportunities for openness that flow from their thoughtful application, in the form of availability of and access to formal and informal learning. Without research, these changes in learning may exclude the very people who most stand to benefit from them.

The call will make you part of the Centre for Research in Education and Educational Technology (CREET)
at The Open University, UK. You will need to reside in the UK, but you can have your research location/context situated anywhere in the world (regarding it is part of your research study). 

If you have a PhD research idea on Open World Learning, and you want to quickly discuss your ideas to see whether they fit in with the Open World Learning concept, feel free to drop a line to Bart Rienties (bart.rienties@open.ac.uk). For detailed information and how to apply for the studentships in general go to www3.open.ac.uk/employment, or call Anne Foward, on 01908 655364 or e-mail CREET-student-enquiries@open.ac.uk. 

In 2016, the Open University is offering 6 three-year, full-time Doctoral Scholarships in Open World Learning fully funded by the Leverhulme Trust. Candidates should have, or expect to gain, a 2.1 or above in an undergraduate degree or a Masters degree in education, language studies, psychology, computer science or another appropriate discipline.

Funding is available for UK, EU and International students. Full funding for the Leverhulme Trust Doctoral Scholarships includes fees and a living allowance for three years, depending on satisfactory progress. The living allowance is currently £14057 in 2015/16.

Deadline for application is 9 March 2016, with potential interviews starting April/May 2016. A quick overview of how to apply can be found here (= filling in the application form (is found in the link), and write a 600 - 1000 word proposal; I put my proposal here as an example). What I did (but not sure whether this approach made a difference), was to start from my research idea, and then see whether people with a OU background had done research in the same area. Then I put that research also into my proposal (not only, just a bit to indicate that I did know OU research). I also contacted a person I knew who worked at the OU, to get a better understanding of what a PhD is like at that institute. Then I referred to that person in my application, just by name to indicate that I was truly actively getting information. Do it, I did it and it is really worthwhile (strengthening knowledge, great research environment, multiple TEL-laboratories available). Sending a proposal does not take too much time, and it is really worth the effort as this is a worldclass institute for those investigating online learning in all its aspects.

To apply, write a short research proposal and explain how your proposal fits the overall theme of Open World Learning and how you intend to conduct research on the topic. In generating your proposal please refer to the additional information for each topic available athttp://www.open.ac.uk/creet/main/postgraduate/phd-studentships.
Please indicate explicitly in your application that you are applying for Leverhulme Doctoral Scholarships in Open World Learning.

The Open University is one of the UK's leading Research Institutions. In the 2014 REF 72% of its research was rated as "world leading" or "internationally excellent". The Open University is ranked 2nd in the UK for its Education research based on quality and breadth (Times Higher research power).

The Centre for Research in Education and Educational Technology (CREET), at the Open University has an international reputation for the quality of its research. Providing postgraduate students with a supportive environment and excellent facilities ensures a future supply of first class researchers. CREET offers you a unique opportunity to study for a PhD in areas such as Technology Enhanced Learning, Learning Analytics, Open Educational Research, International Education and Development and Language and Literacy Studies, guided by world experts. 

A vibrant international community of students is currently studying our MRes and PhD programmes. The Open University provides excellent support for students and offers a full range of training in computer, library and presentation skills. The studentships are full time at the Milton Keynes campus and students are normally expected to live within commuting distance of Milton Keynes.
If you feel that the challenge of research in these exciting and interesting areas is for you and you have the drive and intellectual curiosity to pursue postgraduate research, then we look forward to hearing from you!

Further information, including more details of CREET research, can be found athttp://www.open.ac.uk/creet/main/.

Life as a PhD student: brief overview #phd #highered #research

Yesterday I sent out a call for full scholarship degrees that were open to proposals at the Open University of the UK. As I started to communicate with friends and colleagues wondering whether they should apply for a scholarship (Of Course!), I realized I might add a bit of background based on my own PhD experience.

As an example of  high potential PhD procrastination, download the presentation and take a look at the cartoons by Jorge Cham (FABULOUS!)

Please find a brief overview of my PhD experience and ideas (plus tools and steps) below. If you have additional experiences that I did not cover, let me know. I think this could be useful for other PhD-potentials.

Life as a PhD student: identity, tools, hurdles, and supervisions from Inge de Waard

Full #PhD scholarships in Technology Enhanced Learning #onlinelearning #telearning

The Centre for Research in Education and Educational Technology (CREET) Technology Enhanced Learning Priority Research Area have just released a call for Open Technology Enhanced Learning (OpenTEL) PhD scholarships.

Deadline for application is 31 March 2016. A quick overview of how to apply can be found here (= filling in the application form (is found in the link), and write a 600 - 1000 word proposal; I put my proposal here as an example). What I did (but not sure whether this approach made a difference), was to start from my research idea, and then see whether people with a OU background had done research in the same area. Then I put that research also into my proposal (not only, just a bit to indicate that I did know OU research).  I also contacted a person I knew who worked at the OU, to get a better understanding of what a PhD is like at that institute. Then I referred to that person in my application, just by name to indicate that I was truly actively getting information.
Do it, I did it and it is really worthwhile (strengthening knowledge, great research environment, multiple TEL-laboratories available). Sending a proposal does not take too much time, and it is really worth the effort as this is a worldclass institute for those investigating online learning in all its aspects (mobile learning, MOOC, learning analytics...).

The Centre for Research in Education andEducational Technology at the Open University has an international reputation for the quality of its research. At the Open University research students are provided with a supportive environment and excellent research facilities to ensure a future supply of first class researchers. We are recruiting PhD students in Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) who study under guidance from world-class experts in the field. Open Technology Enhanced Learning (OpenTEL) brings together CREET researchers in the Institute of Educational Technology and Faculty of Education and Language Studies with those from Faculty of Business and Law, Faculty of Mathematics, Computing and Technology, the Knowledge Media Institute, Faculty of Science, and the Faculty of Social Sciences. We encourage interdisciplinary research. If you feel that the challenge of research in this exciting and interesting area is for you and you have the drive and intellectual curiosity to pursue postgraduate research, then we look forward to hearing from you!

We are offering up to 4 fully funded full-time studentships for a 1+3 programme (MRes and PhD) or +3 programme (3-year PhD) - the latter is what I am doing, and almost finishing. 

You will have, or expect, a 2:1 or above in an undergraduate degree or a Master’s degree in education (or equivalent), psychology, computer science or another appropriate discipline. For direct entry to PhD you will need to have completed postgraduate study that includes appropriate research methods.

The Open University is one of the UK’s leading research Institutions. In the 2014 REF 72% of its research was rated as “world leading” or “internationally excellent”, in Education we were ranked 2nd for research power, a measure that combines quality and scale.

There is a vibrant international community of students studying our MRes and PhD programmes. The Open University provides excellent support for students and offers a full range of training in computer, library and presentation skills. The studentships are full time at the Milton Keynes campus and students are normally expected to live within commuting distance of Milton Keynes.

Funding is available for UK, EU and International students. Full funding for studentships will include fees and maintenance (£14057 in 2016/17) for either four years (1+3) or three years, depending on satisfactory progress.

Further information, including more details of CREET research, can be found at http://www.open.ac.uk/creet/main/.

Closing date: 31 March 2016

Interviews will commence in early May 2016

For detailed information and how to apply for the studentships go to www3.open.ac.uk/employment, call Anne Foward, Student Coordinator, on 01908 655364 or e-mail CREET-student-enquiries@open.ac.uk.

Equal Opportunity is University Policy.

Motivational currents to understand informal #MOOC learning #PhD

A PhD journey has its ups and downs. And there is also an ongoing tension to put any findings you might have in a strong theoretical body of knowledge. Proving that your study is part of a scientific field, with strong arguments and good foundations. While I am investigating how experienced learners self-direct their informal MOOC learning (looking at MOOCs in the FutureLearn platform), I have come across a couple of findings that could all be connected to educational research. The difficulty is finding a way to convincingly link the data outcomes: motivation, proximity of context, emotions guiding learning, personal traits (e.g. self-esteem), personal goal setting, individual or/and social learning into a full picture of how my experienced, adult learners go about learning in MOOCs. This lead to some anxiety in my write up stage. The problem was not that I got these outcomes (for the data were clear), but that I had to somehow pin it to a strong previous research that could embrace all these outcomes (or at least most of them, while leaving a possible new angle for my study). So I read a lot, yet kept hitting a wall.

This is where the help, knowledge and experience of supervisors came in (once again). I have been lucky to get two very experienced, intelligent and supportive supervisors (Mike Sharples and Agnes Kukulska-Hulme). I truly mean that. As a PhD student your supervisors are appointed to you, so you need to accept those that you will work with. Supervisors will be your closest colleagues for at least 3 years, which means that they (and you) are the core social team of that part of your professional life. At several points in my PhD journey I would get stuck, or become very anxious, and somehow, supervisors put me and my research back on track by giving pointers (just pointers, not grabbing you by the hand, just simply directing you toward the yellow brick road to find your way home: getting the PhD title).

Similar this time. In this case it was Agnes who pointed me to new research by Zoltan Dörnyei , Christine Muir & Alastair Henry,  Motivational Currents in Language Learning with subtitle: Frameworks for Focused Interventions.
All of a sudden my findings seem to have a central meeting point, and after a first reading, it seems that I will be able to pin what I found to a previous and strong bit of research. Zoltan Dornyei has worked on motivation most of his professional life, but in this book/research he gives it a twist, bringing motivation, emotion, goal/vision setting together and with a clear personal drive that directs the learning. True, what Zoltan looks at is (formal) language learning and cases are mostly coming from project work in class, and not (informal) MOOC learning which I investigate, but as I looked at the lecture he gave (embedded below), my eyes opened and I got the feeling that I had found (thanks to Agnes and Mike) what I was looking for all along: my research hook. So I ordered the paperback version of Dornyei's book, and will get to work with it next week. In the meantime, I am sketching outlines of what I want to say based on the information I got from the shared keynote below.

#Phd journey and shifts in punk identity

Learning is a constant journey, a lifelong journey and that is a true fact when I look at my life. But what I did not realize, was that learning - and the internal/external growth that comes with it - can push identity shifts. My current identity shift, together with my recent  job quest, has led me to rethink who I am, and who I would like to be. If I get my PhD, then who am I?

For years I felt I was the one that "had no diploma" and yet (somewhat against the odds) was "doing stuff with innovative tech in difficult settings", so in my minds eye that was me. No more, no less. 

Practically, that meant that I was the one who you could give a tech challenge, which would evoke enthusiasm instantly: "hei Inge, I want to build a really, really low cost solution for setting up patient records with basic cell phones in sparsely connected areas, any thoughts?" or "how do we hack current MOOCs to use them in non-English speaking high school classrooms?" or "do you have ideas on how to build a MOOC for highly experienced tech people that can be used both internally and publicly while using varied pedagogical options for high-end learners?"... Ah, a challenge! Gimme just a minute......*brain excited and filled with joy of exploration* 

But, my identity was ... (elearning) punk. The others had the degree, I had the solution against the odds. That was who I was. But now this (if I get the degree) will be different. Getting a master three years ago, allowed me to still ignore having a degree. It simply did not dawn on me that I was 'formally certified'. Once I go across the Phd threshold... would that mean I would no longer be an elearning Punk? Will I have succumbed to the system? Which identities did I have? I was at times a truly bad secretary, a moody waitress. I was (and I hope I still am) an activist! I fought for LGBT marriage, for gender equality, for education for all, I was (and am) part of the informal, outsider feminist movement... but it was all DIY, at every stage I was punk... so, who am I becoming, who am I now? Where is my place on this new earth? This might sound funny, but honestly, when looking for a job I just freeze... I do not feel I can charge forward like some lunatic Donna Quichotta, battling all the usual suspects/job seekers by mowing them down with my lack of formal education, and most of all raw energy. Being punk made me fearless. Now I am formal... or am I? 

Two days ago, a twitter friend called me a MOOC ninja. I could honestly have kissed her with oodles of gratitude. Can I still be considered a ninja? When I talked to Stephen Downes at Online Educa Berlin a month ago, he said "now you will be higher qualified then me"... I fell into the abyss when he told me. Completely impossible. Stephen Downes is the one to have several honorary doctorates at the same time, I am just me. I felt as if the ground beneath me was about to devour me for being unreal. It really shook me to the bone, like I was betraying my (old?) self. And for weeks it haunted me, this illusive new me to be.  

So, yesterday I needed to get out of this idea, holding me back. Holding me back from getting my chapters written (no, I do not want to leave my punk status), and keeping me from energetic job hunting. I need to understand the new me, and add her to the identities I have had in the past. I somehow need to find a way to merge this new me with my old one's. 

At this point in time I have been around for 48 years. I have used learning at a distance since 1999, which gives me about 17 years on that field. So quite a bit of time, using technology for learning purposes (either for myself, or with others). The learning technology I have been working with was/is used in low resource settings (eg. Sub-Saharan Africa; rural Latin America) and high resource settings (eg. Northern Europe/America). It spans high school settings and continued professional development (medical field, train-the-trainer options). It spans corporate, academic and NGO's. Financially, budgets of on average 100.000 EUR/Y to get new, sustainable projects, with sustainability and scalability at their core). On a technological side, the learning solutions varied from developing tech solutions for wap-enabled basic phones to smartphones, to mobile MOOC for any type of device, and embracing major MOOC platforms like FutureLearn right now as well. I worked with diverse target audiences from all continents (no, not the antarctic) and I am lucky to be friends with many of the people I work/ed with. The last couple of years I have written articles (academic and corporate style), I have authored one book on MOOC (in the process of another more philosophical/sci-fi) and co-authored one (thank you David Hopkins), and set up MOOCs, eg. MobiMOOC (low-fi), MOOCs on the Internet of Things (high-fi), used by iMinds, one of the top 5 business incubation programs out there. 

Looking back I am quite surprised, it looks like quite a bit of work... so I cannot ignore that I do something. At least I can still have 'I do stuff' in my identity. Maybe that is enough. The fact that I will keep on doing stuff... just doing, not thinking first, but doing ... immediately. No matter what the boundaries look like, just go out there, and make it happen. Just like I did before, but soon with another piece of paper in my backpack. But I cannot ignore that piece of paper. I asked Ellen Wagner whether having a PhD makes a difference. She said very clearly "yes!" and added "when I am stuck in an important meeting with high power people, I just throw my title in and it shifts the balance in the discussion". So, okay, if it is a tool for her, it can be a useful tool for me as well. 

So this is what I came up with (up to now, any suggestions welcomed): I need to ignore the side of me that is scared about getting a degree, and realize it will not destroy the punk in me. I need to set a new, ridiculous goal. That always worked in the past. I need to embrace this new phd reality. Why not set out to become the Susan Sontag of eLearning? Or a futurist, but with a twist?Maybe a bit like Audrey Waters (but, admittedly I am more positive minded). And I need to find a job that will enable me to keep up online shares (looking at the cost that Stephen Downes and the Brain Pickings site have... I need to built in a safety net for punk online activities), as well as looking for a job that will be utterly inspiring due to its many challenges. 

Now, just find an institute, university, or someone that wants to hire me... a love-to-do-and-write-stuff punk with a phd in online education and lots of solution-finding experience.... where art thou ye mind-blowing new job?! 

#PhD #studentships in International Education, #TELearning, a.o.

The Centre for Research in Education and Educational Technology (CREET), department of The Open University based in Milton Keynes, United Kingdom has just sent out details for PhD Studentships in Applied Linguistics, Childhood Studies, Education (including International Education), Languages, Technology Enhanced Learning and Literacies.

As I got a full-time studentship at The Open University, I can assure you that these PhD studentships are worth looking at if you consider to enhance your career. Especially as The Open University is one of the UK’s leading Research Institutions. In the 2014 REF 72% of its research was rated as “world leading” or “internationally excellent”.

If you have a research interest, or just are curious in: mobile learning, international education, technology enhanced learning, mooc, online learning, elearning... than take this chance to apply. It is worth it.

The studentships support the full research learning process (seminars, methodologies, knowledge sharing, workshops, speaking opportunities...), some of which I shared in previous posts here (on my research instruments) and here (on the phd awakening) and also including a reference to the probation report = a report you need to write approximately 10 months after being accepted as a PhD student (it is a UK criteria).

Funding is available for UK, EU and International students.  Full funding for PhD studentships will include fees and maintenance (£13863 in 2014/15) for three years, depending on satisfactory progress.

Further information, including more details of CREET research, can be found at http://www.open.ac.uk/creet/main/
Closing date: 9 March 2015. 
Interviews will commence in April/May 2015.

For detailed information and how to apply for the studentships go to www3.open.ac.uk/employment, call Anne Foward, Student Coordinator, on 01908 655364 or e-mail CREET-student-enquiries@open.ac.uk.

We promote diversity in employment and welcome applications from all sections of the community (the fact they took me as a PhD student confirms their diversity policy).

More information
The Centre for Research in Education and Educational Technology, at the Open University has an international reputation for the quality of its research.  Providing research students with a supportive environment and excellent research facilities ensures a future supply of first class researchers.  CREET offers you a unique opportunity to study for a PhD in Applied Linguistics, Childhood Studies, Education (including International Education), Language and Literacy Studies, Technology Enhanced Learning with guidance from world-class experts in the field.  If you feel that the challenge of research in these exciting and interesting areas is for you and you have the drive and intellectual curiosity to pursue postgraduate research, then we look forward to hearing from you!  We welcome proposals for interdisciplinary research in these areas.

CREET is offering a limited number of fully funded and partially funded full-time studentships for a 1 + 3 programme (MRes and PhD).  Half-funded studentships are also available for applicants who have already secured an external sponsor and you should indicate this in your application when you apply.  Applicants who are able to fully fund themselves are very welcome to apply to CREET.

You should have, or expect, a 2.1 or above in an undergraduate degree or a Masters degree in education, language studies, psychology, computer science or another appropriate discipline.

There is currently a vibrant international community of students studying our MRes and PhD programmes.  The Open University provides excellent support for students and offers a full range of training in computer, library and presentation skills.  The studentships are full time at the Milton Keynes campus and students are normally expected to live within commuting distance of Milton Keynes.

#PhD sharing #online and #MOOC #research instruments

The last couple of months I have been hammering away with data. Trying to collect meaningful answers to the question: "how do experienced online learners determine what they want to learn and how?". Well, the research question sounds a bit more formal, but I like the question this way. This central research question came out of the results from a pilot study which I planned during the first closed beta courses of FutureLearn. The pilot study is in part described in my probation report, which I uploaded in academia and can be found here. The probation report is a report you need to submit to UK based universities to proof that you are PhD material, and that you have been working on research with academic rigor and good progress for approximately 10 months.

And to add to my PhD journey, I will share the first research instruments used for my main study via this blogpost, see below. More instruments or details will follow as I proceed.

sub-questions to build narrative towards answers to the central research question
In order to get answers to the central research question mentioned above, I divided the central research question into five sub-questions, which will hopefully give an idea of the elements I investigated to come to a more complete answer:
1. What are the MOOC participants learning objectives?

2. What are the actions undertaken by the learner to attain self-determined learning goals?
     a. Who do learners connect to in order to learn?
     b. Which technologies do learners use (devices, tools and resources)?
     c. Do they mediate that learning with others or other technologies in order to add it to their learning? If so,          how?

3. What makes a MOOC learner reach further to find an answer to their learning, or what is the point beyond which they think it is not worth the effort to reach an answer for their learning objective?
4. Did emergent learning happen resulting in unexpected learning outcomes?

Quick overview of the methodology

This main study gathered Self-Determined Learning (SDL) experiences from experienced, online learners while they are enrolled in a FutureLearn course. The research consisted of three phases, leading up to conclusions on SDL in FutureLearn courses.

•  Phase 1 – expectations: gathering expectations of the participants enrolled in FutureLearn course via an online survey
• Phase 2 – experiences: collecting learning logs in which the participants are asked to describe two learning episodes every other week for the duration of the course
• Phase 3 – reflections: interviewing the participants (one-on-one) taking part in the study via structured interviews looking into the differences between their expectations and actual perceptions on their SDL as they were participating in the FutureLearn course

The FutureLearn research participants were volunteers selected from those taking part in one of three specific FutureLearn courses. The selection was based on their prior online learning experience (which could be online learning in general, self-taught learning while using the web, MOOC, mobile learning... but they needed to be online and engaged in some kind of learning for over 3 years). 

The pre-course survey questions

For phase 1 just a couple of questions were asked. The aim of the questions was to get an idea of the motivation of the participants for enrolling in that particular course, as well as to allow me to double check their previous online learning experience. 

1.       What is your prior online learning experience? (Multiple choice: no prior experience, 1 year or less online learning experience, less than 3 years online learning experience, less than 5 years online experience, more than 5 years online learning)?

2.       What type of online learning do you have experience with? (Multiple answer: MOOC, online learning, distance education course, learning experience by self-organised learning to stay on top of my field of interest, learning online from my network, self-taught online learning on random subjects, other)

3.       What is your reason for registering for this particular course (Multiple answer: professional interest, personal interest, learning need, other)?

4.       What do you expect to get out of this course? (Open question)

Although you will not find questions related to demographics here, these were in fact provided to all FutureLearn participants as part of the overall pre-course FutureLearn course survey. And I certainly did not want to double up with the survey the participants already filled in (in the past I found that saving time is essential for willingness to participate). 

Learning log template used

In phase 2 the learning log templates were the most important research instrument used in the process of this research study. All the participants were asked to fill in the learning log template at bi-weekly intervals, and to provide two templates for each 'learning log week'. The reason for pacing the learning log frequency, was again to save time for the research participants, yet at the same time get insight in their learning process. I only asked them to start filling in the learning logs from week 2 of the course, as past research into MOOC dynamics showed that from week 2 there is a significant drop in participation from curiosity based participants and at the same time an increase of participation from active participants. 

For those interested in having a look at the learning log template, have a look at this academia upload here. The learning log template consists of open and closed questions, allowing me to find quantitative as well as qualitative data.

#PhD awakening: life at the #OU and in UK

After a chaotic month, where I seem to have hibernated (well, autumnated?) immersed in data collecting, my mind suddenly switched back on again. There still seems to be a lot of PhD work that needs to be done (plan interviews, analyse first data batch, dance to get my body moving), but it is time to reflect and share again.

At the end of this blog I have added a presentation for all who want to become a post-graduate student at the Open University in Milton Keynes, UK. But first a brief insight in Life as a PhD student at the OU.

Switching identities 
In the past year and a half I switched from a well paid full-time, international job to a scholarship at the OU where I started as a student again. In order to study, I moved to the UK (Stony Stratford). This switch resulted in changes, some anticipated, some quite surprising. One of the surprising one's was the fact that I felt my identity was no longer straight forward. It had shifted from 'someone who knows' to 'a starting student who has a lot to learn', evidently there is a saying which I believe in (and paraphrasing heavily): the more we know the less we know... but although I knew this saying, actually experiencing a change in external and internal image resulted in profound reflections on importance, work as an identity provider, and the need to be seen as 'someone who knows' (for me that is). This realisation made me humble again, and more understanding for people who experience these shifts due to life's sudden realities: pensioners, immigrants, ... people that need to pick up a new life, away from what they felt was 'normal' and part of them.

Me, the foreigner
The fact that I moved to another country where I would be seen as a 'foreigner' as soon as I spoke in my Flemish English voice, also resulted in some new experiences. For some people it never matters where you are from, you are just you. Luckily, in the past I have encountered many of those people, mostly because they are also part of the world, and have had multiple continent experiences. For others a foreign accent tend to rouse suspicion, most of the time that suspicion would diminish as soon as I mentioned I would be a 'Belgian'. Which is also strange, as one is never as much a Belgian as in another country. The culture and social do's and don't's are of course different (like all countries these 'normal behavior guidelines' are never outspoken, yet explicitly present) and it takes a while to get used to the differences. How come the interpretation of normal is so different for all of us? And why is different so threatening to some people? We are all constantly changing, our bodies and minds are seldom similar from one day to another, yet difference is such a manipulated concept.

Family under the microscope
When you move to another country with your family, you can bet on it that your relationship will come under additional pressure. Suddenly the social security of family, friends, and even acquaintances is no longer ready and available. You need to survive in the new environment relying on your partner and child/ren. In my case that means tackling extra discussions, because all of our joint personal characteristics got gigantic! There was no way we could voice our personal complaints to others while drinking coffee/tea/beer/wine... it was just us. Frustration became a recurrent feeling, until we accepted once again what each of us stood for. We realized why we were partners, why at some point we choose for each other: "with all our qualities and defaults". This was a crucial step in our mutual family relationship: suddenly - and more then ever - we accepted who we were. We saw each other under a microscope, yelled, complained, and made up with the realization that we were indeed stronger then before.

Stagnate or go for change?
As all these experiences still boggle my mind from time to time, and life's certainties seem to be broken down on a daily basis, I often wonder: is it worth it? The change in life? Becoming a student once again? Because the future is uncertain, my age is quickly approaching 50 (WHAT!) and that gives me an additional strange feeling of doubt.

Yes, it is. Oh yes! It is so worth all the tension, the adaptations, the new reflections, the uncertainties, the feeling of doubt and the realization of the really important things in life. But, I have to add that I am in a rather luxurious position: I do have someone to come home to, I know people that I can depend on, and I have a home somewhere on this planet that I can call my own. So, I can actually make this choice, and the choice is not thrust upon me.

Get your proposal in and become a PhD student yourself

Life as a ph d student at ou from Inge Ignatia de Waard

#PhD: importance of personalisation in #qualitative research

Although I know and understand the concept of trust in online communities, up until yesterday I underestimated the effect of being among participants to allow them to connect.

In my current main study, I am investigating online learning as it is done by experienced online learners. I look at how they learn inside of the course. I ask them to fill in and share learning logs to get an idea of their informal learning as well. The learning logs also try to capture who learners talk to, or reach out to, either to find additional answers, or simply to share learning experiences. And as the first learning logs are coming in, I read them with the utmost interest and enthusiasm. The learning logs capture the learning in self-reported descriptions coming from participants taking part in three different FutureLearn courses. Although my research is qualitative, I was not fully part of the courses, not as much as I wanted to at first. But then the importance of personalisation kicked in and now I adjusted my way of research a bit.

Increasing personalisation
The first steps I took to increase a personalized approach for each of the research participants was:

• building different documents, research instruments and communications for each course. Practically this means 14 different communications, 7 different research instruments, 6 different reference documents. Not taken into account the small adaptations I made to the documents (e.g. for those participants joining the research later on in the course, requiring a different research timing).
• ensure each document, communication, or research instrument was written in a personalized way (this is not always easy, but it turned out to be definitely worthwhile)
• providing a course recognizable unique identifier for each participant, creating a visible link between a number  and the course (the unique identifier is a number used to anonymise participant data)
• address each participant with the first name they provided in the informed consent. This I do for each communication going out from me to them.
• add the unique identifier to each outgoing communication, making sure it is connected to that participant

As you can imagine, all the above measures increase the mistakes that can be made. I have been mailing about 900 communications at this point in time, all personalized - or trying to. And indeed I have been making mistakes (e.g. forgetting attachments, referring to wrong online links that are actually from other courses under investigation). Rectifying these mistakes is necessary of course, but it means sometimes participants get multiple mails, which is tough on their time schedules.

How far can you go with personalisation?
Though the learning logs are coming in, I kept feeling I was not reaching out to my research participants in a way that I could reach out to them. I felt I was missing a step. As such I strolled through the three courses of which I had participants. After having taken a look at the courses, I took another look at my research instruments (the provided learning logs in particular). Then I realized that my instruments were not personal enough. Not personal as referencing to the participants, but personal in connection with the FutureLearn courses to which the learning logs were referring too. I suddenly realized I could make them fit each course more carefully, hence making them more meaningful, more trustworthy (or that was what I was thinking).

So I went back to the drawing board, and before the last of the three FutureLearn courses started, I made sure that I personalized some of the research instruments (mainly the learning log) to make it more recognisable to the participants of that specific course. This was really necessary, as the third FutureLearn course (Basic Science: Understanding Experiments), was a hands-on course, while the other two courses I am investigating were more classic study courses (no hands-on experimenting, just understanding): one on Decision making in a complex and uncertain world, and one on the Science of Medicines.

More time, better realisations, becoming more involved

While having adjusted the documents and instruments, and beginning to get more familiar with the communications that need to go out, I was beginning to breath again. Gaining time once again. So, I had a look at the courses once again. 

This is where I realized I had not engaged with the courses the way I intended. Granted, for the course on Science of Medicines, I had planned to follow the course week on Diabetes only, as I have diabetes type 1 and I feel that all knowledge can help by keeping in tune with my illness. 

The 

So I started to engage with the courses, and suddenly I realized that this extra layer of engagement provided me with a triple return! 

• First of all I participated in the same courses as my participants, I could understand some of their remarks in more detail. 
• Second I connected with some participants, hence becoming more of a 'real' person to them. Not the distant researcher, but the human sharing experiences.
• Thirdly I learned the content of the courses, and got motivated to learn more. 

Wondering what the limit is of this type of personalization?

Did this result in an extra return for my research? 

It seems so, as people seem to respond more on my requests to share their experiences. So now I have a potential paper taking shape in my mind on the importance of being their as a researcher, also for online phenomenological research (which is what I am doing), and pointing towards possible effects of being part of the learning environment in a non-formal role, simply as a participant but for no other reason then simply taking part in the course. A bit of ethnographic research presence, but with less impact on the proceedings in the learning environment. 

Well, just sharing so I can remember once I write my thesis. Research is such a learning journey!