Scholarship in Student Affairs Revisited: The Summit on Scholarship, March 2006

Jablonski, Margaret; Mena, Salvador Bienvenido; Manning, Kathleen; Carpenter, Stanley D. M.; Siko, Kari Lee

doi:10.2202/1949-6605.1729

Cited by 14 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given the benefits and the necessity of practitioner research engagement, it would seem reasonable that practitioners would be drawn to engage in this work regularly. However, the literature suggests that many practitioners do not engage in regular research activities (Hatfield & Wise, 2015;Jablonski et al, 2006), which can negatively impact practitioners' ability to make data-informed decisions regarding services and programming (Carpenter, 2001;Schuh et al, 2016;White, 2002). This lack of practitioner engagement in research is due to three key factors: the busyness of daily practice (Schroeder & Pike, 2001;Sriram, 2011), the perception that research is irrelevant to applied practice in higher education (Kezar, 2000), and inadequate training in research methodologies and skills (Daniel et al, 2016;Herdlein, 2004;Schroeder & Pike, 2001;Sriram, 2011;Waple, 2006;Young & Janosik, 2007).…”

Section: Encouraging Practitioner Research Engagement: Overcoming Barmentioning

confidence: 99%

Encouraging Practitioner Research Engagement: Overcoming Barriers

Cole

2020

JPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite a body of evidence showing the vast benefits of practitioner engagement in higher education research, the literature suggests that many practitioners do not regularly engage in research activities due to three main barriers: the busyness of daily practice, perceived irrelevance of research to practice, and inadequate training to engage in research. This article reviews the literature on each of these three barriers, providing practitioners in higher education insight into how to overcome these barriers to successfully engage in regular research. Through an analysis of current literature, this article furthers the understanding of practitioner research engagement despite common barriers.

show abstract

Section: Encouraging Practitioner Research Engagement: Overcoming Barmentioning

confidence: 99%

Encouraging Practitioner Research Engagement: Overcoming Barriers

Cole

2020

JPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regardless of the degree to which participants identified across the scholar-practitioner spectrum (Jablonski et al, 2006), involvement in a peer-led research project helped participants to confront their assumptions and develop deeper understandings of the potential for scholarship to enhance their education and to complement their everyday practice in student affairs.…”

Section: Scholar-practitioner As An Individual Identitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since then, a recurrent reason cited for the disconnect between a desire for student affairs research engagement and its actual occurrence is inadequate graduate preparation in research literacy, design, and implementation (Hatfield & Wise, 2013;Sriram, 2011). Moreover, even when student affairs practitioners have the training, they may fail to see scholarly engagement as a key part of their field (Jablonski et al, 2006). Investigating the graduate preparation of student affairs professionals as scholar-practitioners provides insight into how to further this key competency.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While students may be taught how to engage in research, the emphasis is often on their individual research projects and interests (Golde, 2005;Lovitts, 2008). Yet, in student affairs practice, research is often conducted in collaboration with others (Jablonski et al, 2006). Our case study examines the ways in which first-year master's students and doctoral students experience and navigate participation on research teams as part of a higher education research course.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Examining Scholar-Practitioner Identity in Peer-Led Research Communities in Higher Education Programs

Bettencourt

Malaney

Kidder

et al. 2017

JSPTE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore how research skills and communities can be promoted in student affairs and/or higher education graduate preparation programs through a peer-led, team-based model. Background: Numerous scholars emphasized a lack of empirical research being conducted by student affairs professionals, even though integration of scholarship with practice remains of critical importance to field of higher education. Methodology: Though a descriptive case study of a graduate research course, we engage both quantitative and qualitative data points in a convergent parallel mixed methods design. Contribution: This study provides an important contribution in understanding how graduate programs may better prepare students to engage within a spectrum of scholar-practitioner identity. Findings: Findings suggest that while participants see value in a scholar-practitioner identity and its impact on their future goals, there is often a discrepancy between the perceived feasibility of embodying the role in actual student affairs practice as well as variations across master’s and doctoral student levels. Recommendations for Practitioners: Recommendations for practice include working to integrate scholarship in professional positions and promoting greater collaboration between graduate coursework and professional supervisors. Recommendation for Researchers: Recommendations for researchers include continuing to examine how communities of practice develop across the levels of graduate socialization. Impact on Society: Understanding how individuals engage in scholarship in their fields carries interdisciplinary implications for merging research into professional roles. Future Research: A key area for future research is longitudinal inquiry into how emerging professionals in higher education/student affairs negotiate the scholar-practitioner spectrum across career development.

show abstract

“…Still others suggest a more complex way of viewing the spaces student affairs educators occupy with respect to the scholarship in the field. Manning pondered the division between faculty and practitioners in student affairs by proposing a continuum from pure scholar to pure practitioner, arguing that not all educators in student affairs should contribute to the creation of scholarship (Jablonski, Mena, Manning, Carpenter, & Siko, ). In her model, there are pure scholars , individuals who have exclusively contributed to the scholarship in the field and who have spent little time as administrators.…”

Section: Defining Research‐driven Practicementioning

confidence: 99%