In 1994, the Spencer Foundation embarked on an ambitious experimental initiative to support the preparation of education researchers. Over the 13-year span of the Research Training Grant (RTG) program, the foundation made multiyear awards to more than a dozen leading institutions in the United States and South Africa. This article introduces the RTG program—its history, goals, and practices—as a context for the four case studies of program implementation that follow.
Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study
This article traces the development of the RTG program, situating it in the longstanding commitment of the Spencer Foundation to promote high-quality education research and describing the purposes and practices of the program. The primary strategy of the initiative was to provide block grants to institutions to support individual students engaged in full-time doctoral study focused on research preparation. The recipient institutions were expected to develop research training activities and models that might be institutionalized to benefit all doctoral students they served, and not just those supported directly by RTG funds. The purpose of this article is to provide a sense of the history, conversations, and contexts of the Spencer Foundation's investments in this strategy to strengthen the educational research community through the preparation of future scholars.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Association of American Universities. (1998). Committee on graduate education: Report and recommendations. Retrieved December 7, 2007, from Association of American Universities Web site: http://www.aau.edu/reports/GradEdRpt.html.
2.
GoldeC. M., and DoreT. M. (2000, December). At cross purposes: What the experiences of today's doctoral students reveal about doctoral education, 2001. Madison: University of Wisconsin.
3.
GrahamP. A. (1994). Annual report. Chicago: Spencer Foundation.
4.
GreenoJ. G., McDermottR., ColeK. A., EngleR. A., GoldmanS., and KnudsenJ.. (1999). Research, reform, and aims in education: Modes of action in search of each other. In LagemannE.C., and ShulmanL.S. (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities (pp. 299—335). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.
HeathS. B. (1999). Discipline and disciplines in education research: Elusive goals? In LagemannE.C., and ShulmanL.S. (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities (pp. 203—223). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6.
HofferT. B., WelchV., WilliamsK., HessM., WebberK., and LisekB.. (2005). Doctorate recipients from United States universities: Summary report 2004. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center.
7.
JamesH. T. (1977, January). Since 1970. Report to the Spencer Foundation Board of Directors, Chicago, IL.
8.
JudgeH. (1982). American graduate schools of education: A view from abroad (A report to the Ford Foundation). New York: Ford Foundation.
9.
KaminskyA. (1999, March). Quality and methodology in education research and training: Learning through difference. Paper presented at the Spencer/Stanford University School of Education RTG Working Conference on Methodology and Quality, Palo Alto, CA.
10.
LabareeD. F. (2004). The trouble with ed schools. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
11.
LagemannE. C. (2000). An elusive science: The troubling history of education research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12.
MetzM. (2001). Intellectual border crossing in graduate education: A report from the field. Educational Researcher, 30(5), 12—18.
13.
MitchellT. R. (1997). Border crossings: Organizational boundaries and challenges to the American professoriate. Daedalus, Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 126, 265—292.
14.
MitchellT. R., and HaroA. (1999) Poles apart: Reconciling the dichotomies in education research. In LagemannE.C., and ShulmanL.S. (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities (pp. 42—62). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15.
National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Science and Engineering. (1995). Reshaping the graduate education of scientists and engineers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
16.
National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research (R. J. Shavelson & L. Towne, Eds.), Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
17.
National Research Council, Committee for the Study of Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States. (1995). Research-doctorate programs in the United States: Continuity and change. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
18.
NeradM., and CernyJ. (1999). From rumors to facts: Career outcomes of English PhDs, Results from the PhDs Ten Years Later Study. Council of Graduate Schools Communicator, 32(7), 1—11.
19.
NeumannA., PallasA. M., and PetersonP. L. (1999). Preparing education practitioners to practice education research. In LagemannE., and ShulmanL. (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities (pp. 247—288). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
20.
PageR. N. (2001). Reshaping graduate preparation in educational research methods: One school's experience. Educational Researcher, 30(6), 19—25.
21.
PallasA. M. (2001). Preparing education doctoral students for epistemological diversity. Educational Researcher, 30(6), 6—11.
22.
RaudenbushS. (2003, November). Crafting methodological training. Paper presented at the National Research Council Committee on Research in Education meeting, A National Conversation About Doctoral Programs for Future Leaders in Education Research, Washington, DC.
23.
SchoenfeldA. (1992). Research methods in and for the learning sciences [Introduction to Special Issue]. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 137—139.
24.
SchoenfeldA. (1999). The core, the canon, and the development of research skills: Issues in the preparation of education researchers. In LagemannE.C., and ShulmanL.S. (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities (pp. 166—202). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
25.
SchonD. (1995). The new scholarship requires a new epistemology, Change, 27, 26—34.
26.
ShulmanL. S. (1999). Professing educational scholarship. In LagemannE.C., and ShulmanL.S. (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities (pp. 159—165). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27.
ShulmanL. S., GoldeC. M., BueschelA. C., and GarabedianK. J. (2006). Reclaiming education's doctorates: A critique and a proposal. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 25—32.
28.
Siddle WalkerV. (1999). Culture and commitment: Challenges for the future training of education researchers. In LagemannE.C., and ShulmanL.S. (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities (pp. 224—244). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29.
FoundationSpencer. (1971). Annual report for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1971. Chicago: Author.
30.
FoundationSpencer. (1996). Twenty-five years of grantmaking. In The Spencer Foundation 1996 Annual Report. Chicago: Author.
31.
U.S. News and World Report. (2001). Best Graduate Schools 2002. Washington DC: Author.
32.
WilsonW. J. (1974). The new Black sociology: Reflections on the “insiders” and “outsiders” controversy. In BlackwellJ.E., and JanowitzM. (Eds.), Black sociologists: Historical and contemporary perspectives (pp. 322—338). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33.
YoungL. J. (2001). Border crossing and other journeys: Re-envisioning the doctoral preparation of education researchers. Educational Researcher, 30(6), 3—5.
