Scholar-Practitioner-Leaders as Learners
By Kelley Conrad
The Beginnings
Some time ago, the College of听 Doctoral Studies developed the Scholar-Practitioner-Leader model to depict its mission (Coe, 2008). This new framework combined classical cognitive conceptions of doctoral scholarship 鈥 including high rigor of inquiry, academic study, and practical application 鈥 with the affective domains of learning. The model is based in part on Kegan鈥檚 (2001) observation that one cannot know something in purely cognitive or affective ways but must develop awareness from their introspection.
The Scholar-Practitioner-Leader framework is designed to develop a graduate who embodies this framework as a Scholar-Practitioner-Leader (SPL). Each SPL has learned to be a curious, reflective thinker. They are capable of responding quickly to emerging opportunities, and diagnosing and addressing immediate and local problems. SPLs are often seen driving innovation and creating new products and processes, ultimately advancing the community of practice.
Scholar Learners
SPLs are interested in lifelong learning. They are adept as learners because of their tri-part development and perspective. Self-determination theory (SDT) (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000), a needs-based theory of motivation, identified the quest for competence as one of three basic human needs and a basis for action. As scholars, SPL learners value competence, confidently believe they can accomplish goals, and are willing to take on new challenges on their own or with others (Bandura, 1977; Bandura, 2012). SPLs are adults, like those observed by Knowles, Holton, and Swanson (2005), who need to know, are ready to learn and respond well to problem-centered challenges.
As educators, SPLs have experienced failures and overcome them. These experiences assist in overcoming the negative perceptions associated with the fear of failure. This is a first step in moving ahead to learn new tasks. MacLennan (2008) in 鈥淒o the Thing You Think You Cannot Do,鈥 noted such educators are 鈥渂etter positioned to create a learning environment in which learners can more comfortably meet and overcome their own fears鈥 (pp. 396-397).
SPLs as learners are also information literate people. They demonstrate an informed capacity to recognize 鈥溾hen information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use the needed information鈥 (ALA, 1989, p. 1)
Does your scholarship reflect that of a Scholar-Practitioner-Leader? To answer this, reflect on the following:鈥
How does my scholarly writing reflect a clear understanding of my sources, credit them correctly, and present my thinking and understanding in a clear, effective way?
How do I make sure my data is objective and clearly described in my descriptions?鈥 What feedback have I received about the objectivity and clarity of my writing?
Practitioner Learners
The workplace is the place to apply one鈥檚 knowledge. Klusek and Bornstein (2005) confirmed this in a study of the Department of Labor鈥檚 Occupational Information Network (O*Net). As a result of reviewing 21 job profiles, they found critical thinking, selecting appropriate strategies, active listening, active learning, careful listening, performance self-monitoring, effective writing, and skilled presentation were routine job requirements. SPLs as practitioners meet these demands of the work and business worlds. Bruce (1999) noted being an effective practitioner includes using emerging and different technologies while addressing broad professional responsibilities in a socially collaborative way. SPLs know the value of information and have developed skills, like information literacy, to become active learners and listeners. As observed by Kirkton and Barham (2005), the problems and information needs of the workplace are complex.鈥 They are often open-ended and unclear and may overwhelm unprepared practitioners who are on their own to assess and address the problems. Not so with SPLs who have balanced, in-depth knowledge, skills, and abilities appropriate to addressing the practical challenges. Also, SPLs have practiced applied problem-solving to create satisfactory, workable solutions.
McCarthy (2015) noted how the confidence of SPL learners as adult learners creates a special learning perspective,
When adult learners see the relevance of research to their professional practice, they are more likely to continue accessing and conducting research as practitioners, becoming lifelong learners, partners with academic researchers, and members of a community of practice to enrich their learning and teaching. Since graduating, these students have followed up their newfound passion for research and are confident in their own ability to conduct research. (p. 326)
Does your professional experience reflect that of a Scholar-Practitioner-Leader? Two questions to help you reflect on this are as follows:鈥
How knowledgeable am I about the thinking, issues, conflicts, and research affecting my chosen field of practice now and in the future?
What is my level of applied experience?鈥 Is it adequate to obtain the kind and level of responsibilities I desire? How can I begin to make a name for myself as an emerging professional in my field?
Leader Learners
SPLs in learning roles understand the use of motivation to enervate others. As one of the basic human needs described by self-determination theory, SPLs engage others in a group to provide focus in collaborative, satisfying efforts. By appreciating that group efforts and decision-making are often better than simply the sum of the individual parts, SPLs build supportive tasks and efforts conducive to internal motivation, deep learning, and creativity of group decisions and actions (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). The payoffs are significant. Relatedness, one of the dimensions of Gagn臈 and Deci鈥檚 (2005) self-determination theory, describes our innate tendencies toward being connected with others. Relatedness includes being effective and operating in coherence with the environment and others. When these relatedness needs are satisfied, people experience improved mental health.
Such relatedness is another key component easily facilitated by SPLs. As experienced action learners, SPLs routinely reflect on and improve their own performance, tightly interlink their reflection with subsequent behavior, and publically espouse their experiences to various groups and people concerned or interested in a specific practice (Altrichter, Kemmis, McTaggart, & Zuber-Skerritt, 2002).
Does your leadership reflect that of a Scholar-Practitioner-Leader? Ask yourself the following:鈥
Short term, how can I develop my skills and comfort as a leader?鈥 What immediate opportunities do I have to extend my leadership competencies and effectiveness?
Going forward, what leadership role do I see for myself?鈥 How will I position myself to obtain such a role?鈥 How will I ensure my preparation?
Conclusion
The SPL model, as it is built into the College of Doctoral Studies (CDS) curriculum and courses, is designed to help students develop a deeper awareness of who they are currently and how they are changing as a result of their graduate education. By combining the academic, practitioner, and leadership perspectives on education and development, the SPL model frames the development of highly effective graduates who are prepared to be leaders in the challenging world today, whether as scholars, practitioners, leaders, or, ideally, a powerful and unique blending of all three perspectives.
The鈥痶hree prominent research centers in CDS extend the development available in the classrooms by establishing an active, research-oriented forum to connect students and faculty with active, ongoing research. The Centers also provide an avenue for faculty to work collaboratively on practical, real-world research, and for students to connect with faculty in this active research. Such experiences are invaluable to both students and faculty.
听
References
Altrichter, H., Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Zuber-Skerritt, O. (2002). The concept of action research,鈥疞earning Organization,鈥9(3), 125-131.
American Library Association. (1989, January 10). Presidential Committee on information literacy: Final report. Retrieved from鈥痯耻产濒颈肠补迟颈辞苍蝉/飞丑颈迟别辫补辫别谤蝉/辫谤别蝉颈诲别苍迟颈补濒.肠蹿尘
Bandura, A. (1977) Self-efficacy: towards a unifying theory of behavioral change.鈥疨sychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited.鈥疛ournal of Management, 38(1), 9-44
Bruce, C. S. (1999). Workplace experiences of information literacy.鈥疘nternational Journal of Information Management, 19, 33-47.
Coe, A. (2008). Scholar-Practitioner-Leader model (SPL) [PowerPoint]. Presented at the 爱污传媒 Full-Time Faculty Meeting, November 13, 2008.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The 鈥淲hat鈥 and 鈥淲hy鈥 of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior.鈥疨sychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
Gagn臈, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation.鈥疛ournal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331-362.
Kegan, R. (2001).鈥疘n over our heads. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kirkton, J., & Barham, L. (2005). Information literacy in the workplace.鈥疉ustralian Library Journal, 54(4), 365-376. Retrieved from鈥痑濒箩/54.4/蹿耻濒濒.迟别虫迟/办颈谤迟辞苍.产补谤丑补尘.丑迟尘濒
Klusek, L., & Bornstein, J. (2006). Information literacy skills for business careers.鈥疛ournal of Business and Finance Librarianship, 11(4), 3-21.
Knowles, M. S., Holton III, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005).鈥疶he adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development鈥(6th鈥痚d.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
MacLennan, J. (2008). 鈥淒o the thing you think you cannot do:鈥 The imperative to be an adult learner in order to be a more effective adult educator.鈥疉ustralian Journal of Adult Learning, 48(2), 386-398.
McCarthy, G. (2015). Motivating and enabling adult learners to develop research skills.鈥疉ustralian Journal of Adult Learning, 55(2), 309-330.
Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice.鈥疶heory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133-144.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.)鈥疕andbook of self-determination research鈥(pp. 3-33). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Dr. Kelley Conrad
Bio
Dr. Kelley Conrad is an author, scholar, and a long-standing member of the 爱污传媒 and the College of Doctoral Studies.