Insights for Online Program Administrators from PhD Learners’ Summer Institute Residency Experiences

Abstract

The week-long, in-person Summer Institute offers students a unique and enriching experience that greatly influences their educational journey. One of the key benefits is the opportunity for face-to-face interactions, which can be transformative in an era dominated by online learning. Students can engage in real-time discussions, forge meaningful connections with peers and instructors, and immerse themselves in a dynamic learning environment. However, this format also presents some challenges. The intense nature of the institute can be physically and mentally demanding, and students may struggle to balance it with their other commitments. Additionally, some students might face geographical or financial barriers that limit their participation. Despite these challenges, the impact of summer institutes is profound. They provide a chance for students to deepen their understanding of the subject matter, develop essential skills, and gain valuable insights from experts in the field. Moreover, camaraderie and networking opportunities can enhance their academic and professional development. This experience highlights the importance of integrating in-person components into predominantly online programs. It underscores the role of human connection in education, which can positively influence student motivation, engagement, and retention. Specifically, the Summer Institute program is for online doctoral students who often feel disconnected, especially through the dissertation process (Melián et al., 2023). Many of the students are older, working students who have consistently succeeded in graduate-level coursework. As universities and institutions adapt to evolving educational landscapes, the lessons learned from these summer institutes can inform more effective strategies for student support and engagement by distance learning administrators.

Keywords: Distance Student Engagement, Summer Institute, Thematic Analysis

Insights for Online Program Administrators from PhD Learners’ Summer Institute Residency Experiences 

Online learning has democratized access to education, which allows learners from diverse backgrounds to access a wide range of courses and resources from anywhere in the world. However, despite the convenience and accessibility of online education, the importance of creating a sense of community and belonging cannot be overstated (Peacock et al., 2020). In-person experiences can provide opportunities for direct interaction, hands-on activities, and social engagement, which are crucial for comprehensive learning and personal development (Clapper, 2018; Cohodes et al., 2024; Richtarek et al., 2022). This study aims to explore the perceptions of a week-long, in-person Summer Institute, examining how such immersive experiences can impact the learning process in a PhD program. As administrators and faculty of the online doctoral degree program, the research team was eager to conduct this study to help make improvements to future institutes.

For distance education administrators, PhD programs offered online, with an immersive in-person experience, often called residency, are a method to develop community and support networking (Ellis et al., 2014). However, an immersive face-to-face experience can present barriers for some students due to the cost of travel, the time required for in-person participation, and the need to balance work/life issues (Gardner et al., 2021). It is crucial for administrators to understand the experiences of PhD students when the program includes an immersive in-person component. This understanding can inform how the immersive experience enhances student and faculty connections. Administrators must consider perspectives on learning, the development of a sense of community, and student satisfaction. Students in doctoral programs need to acquire essential knowledge, skills, and abilities to be effective post-graduation and gain employment (Young, 2020). Additionally, it is vital for administrators to develop and design programs that support retention and completion rates. Research highlights the significance of creating a sense of community in doctoral education (Lively et al., 2021). Research is needed for administrators to provide insights that can inform PhD program design and improvement, ultimately supporting the development of a cohesive and effective learning environment.

Purpose and Objectives

The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of distance learners regarding their participation in a week-long, in-person summer institute as part of an online PhD program. The study aims to understand how such immersive experiences influence students’ learning processes, sense of community, and overall satisfaction. By examining the benefits, challenges, and areas for improvement from the students’ perspectives, the research seeks to provide insights that can inform the development of more effective hybrid learning strategies. These strategies aim to enhance student engagement, motivation, and retention, ultimately supporting the success of distance learners in doctoral programs. Online doctoral students face unique challenges and opportunities, and while online education offers flexibility and accessibility (Akojie et al., 2019; Woo et al., 2019), students often report feelings of isolation and a desire for more interaction with peers and faculty (Akojie et al., 2019; Tichavsky et al., 2015). To address these concerns, programs have implemented various strategies, including cohort models, supportive mentorship (Akojie et al., 2019), and blended learning approaches incorporating online and face-to-face components (Berry, 2019; Keengwe & Wilsey, 2012). Short-term, in-person events like summer institutes or orientations can help foster a sense of community among online students (Berry, 2019; Myers et al., 2015). The following research questions are the foundation of this study:

Research Question 1:  How do online PhD students perceive the challenges of attending an in-person Summer Institute?

Research Question 2: How do online PhD students perceive the benefits of attending an in-person Summer Institute?

Research Question 3: What improvements do online PhD students suggest for future in-person summer institutes support learning and overall experience better?

Methods

The researchers employed a qualitative one-shot case study methodology, which Campbell and Stanley (1963) define as “a design in which a single group is studied only once, subsequent to some agent or treatment” (p. 6). This approach is particularly suitable for examining the perceptions and experiences of a specific group in a unique context (Yin, 2018). The research focused on students in an online PhD program attending a mandatory one-week face-to-face Summer Institute, with a sample size of 15 participants. This method facilitated a rigorous and systematic qualitative data analysis, generating meaningful insights into the students’ experiences. The team strictly adhered to ethical considerations throughout the research process, including obtaining IRB approval, securing informed consent, and ensuring confidentiality. The researchers’ institution granted IRB approval before data collection began.

Setting Description

Summer Institute is a significant annual event for online doctoral students at a Research 1 southern university. It occurs over eight days in the summer semester and provides a blend of academic and social experiences. The university holds the Summer Institute on campus, so students can get to know the campus and feel they are a part of the university community. The university has offered the Summer Institute for over 20 years, and anecdotes connect to the doctoral program’s high completion rate. Students attend courses specific to their year in the program, including Foundations of Higher Education, Research Design and Analysis (first-year students), Seminar on the Modern Community College: Foundations, Philosophy, and Vision, and Program Evaluation in Education (second-year students). The institute also features guest scholars presenting on topics relevant to future leaders. Alongside academic sessions, students engage in various social and networking activities, including meals together and the invited DuBois Leadership Lecture, creating a comprehensive learning and community-building environment.

Participants

In this study, the researchers utilized a census sampling strategy, inviting all first and second-year doctoral students in the online doctoral program who attended the Summer Institute to participate in interviews. This method ensured a comprehensive inclusion of the target population, aligning with the principles of census sampling, which invites every member to participate (Etikan et al., 2016). The study’s sample included 15 students, six first-year, and nine second-year doctoral students who are in an online doctoral program for community college leadership and had just attended an eight-day in-person Summer Institute. The researchers intended this approach to gather diverse insights and experiences from students involved in this specific academic context.

Data Collection

Data collection involved conducting 15 interviews within one week of the in-person residency program’s conclusion, with seven interviews conducted by one researcher and eight by a second researcher. The first researcher invited the group to participate before the Summer Institute to avoid potentially hearing from those who had extremely positive or negative experiences. The second researcher’s group was invited on the last day of the institute. Interviews were conducted via Zoom and transcribed using otter.ai. Researchers conducted structured interviews with participants post-institute to capture insights into their experiences and perceptions. This approach enabled a comprehensive understanding of the impact that face-to-face interaction has in an otherwise online learning environment. Researchers applied thematic analysis to analyze the data, a method ideal for identifying, analyzing, and reporting data patterns. This method of analysis aligns well with case study research (Braun & Clarke, 2006).

Data Analysis

Data analysis followed Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis approach. Initially, transcripts from the interviews were read and re-read for familiarization. This was followed by generating initial codes from the data. These codes were then organized into potential themes, carefully reviewed, and refined for coherence and consistency. The researchers defined and named the themes, capturing the essence of what each theme represented about the data. This process ensured a rigorous and systematic analysis of the qualitative data, enabling the emergence of meaningful insights about the doctoral students’ experiences at the Summer Institute (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Additionally, codes and themes were provided to two leaders in the online program for review to ensure the accuracy and credibility of the results (Creswell & Miller, 2000). The data analysis was performed using IntellectusQualitative software without employing AI-assisted analysis. This methodology allowed for an in-depth exploration of the participants’ perspectives on the challenges, benefits, and potential improvements of the face-to-face summer institute within their online PhD program context. 

Findings

The findings from this study exploring the experiences of online PhD students attending an in-person Summer Institute identified several themes related to challenges, benefits, and suggested improvements for future Summer Institutes. The researchers present findings in terms of the challenges, the perceived benefits, and recommendations for improvements. The analysis of the student interviews identifies key themes related to balancing professional and personal commitments, academic preparation, valuing in-person learning, and suggestions for logical and structural changes.

Research Question 1:  How do online PhD students perceive the challenges of attending an in-person Summer Institute Residency?

Regarding challenges, the researchers generated two main themes, shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2, “Balancing Work and Personal Well-being” and “Preparing to Attend and Academic Setting.” The first theme, “Balancing Work and Personal Well-being,” highlighted the difficulties students faced in managing their professional responsibilities, family obligations, and personal needs while attending the institute face-to-face.

Figure 1

List of Codes for Challenges Theme 1 

 One student expressed that this challenge can be addressed by planning, “I just had to make time for and plan accordingly, get my family ready to leave, and get my job ready to leave, … have to reassign job responsibilities to other people ...while I’m gone…you know, nothing insurmountable, just preparation.” Balancing work and school proved to be a challenge for many participants. One participant noted and stressed this difficulty with the comments, “I was also working. So, I had to attend to work in the evenings. My staff needs me. And then they’re emerging issues that occur that require attention. So that’s been challenging.” The balancing act extended to family responsibilities for several as well. One participant highlighted how technology kept them connected during the in-person experience with family and their students, explaining, “Like emails galore of our text messages, Hey, Mom, where’s this? Hey, honey, where did you put that? You know, those sorts of things. And then stuff from students, as much as I’ve tried to get out in front of it, there was some textbook issue—and all of this mess that I was trying to juggle.”

While only one student faced challenges with social connection, her bravery in sharing her experience was helpful so that we could create intentional ways to help students socialize together. She shared, “I had a hard time connecting with anyone. I asked to go to dinner with some women. And I was told no. And I was like, Oh, okay. Okay. It was like a very clear message. Never in my life has that happened. So, yeah, so that was that was a challenge for me, because it’s like, not only do I feel a little alone, because I’m, I’m not in the VA system. And a lot of people already know each other. You know, I was coming from out of state. I didn’t really know anyone…” While this was a lone story that countered the majority talking about increased connection through the Summer Institute, the bravery of this student sharing her story helps plan for next year’s institute, where the institution will be more intentional in their opening social event to ensure they have some casually structured get to know each other activities. This student went on to find a group of students to connect with, so she had an overall positive experience throughout the eight days.

Figure 2

List of Codes for Challenges Theme 2 

 The second challenge theme, “Preparing to Attend and Academic Settings,” encompassed issues related to travel arrangements, understanding dress codes, navigating the academic environment, and managing coursework expectations. Students expressed various concerns about balancing their commitments while attending the institute. One student shared, “My challenge was I was still trying to wrap up work before I came.” Another student highlighted the logistical difficulties, stating, “Yeah, there were a lot of challenges getting to the institute, just because having family at home, you know, it was difficult. And just, you know, the cost of being there is definitely difficult, but it’s not undoable. And I think since you know ahead of time that you know before you sign up for the program, it’s already told up front.” Additionally, another participant described the personal challenges of being away from family: “So I will be honest with you, the only other time I have been away from my family in the past my son’s 21 years old, is either I was in the hospital having his sister and I’ve done one other work overnight thing. So it was a huge adjustment last year for my family to be gone for that period of time.” These reflections underscore the diverse and significant challenges students face in balancing professional, personal, and academic responsibilities.

Regarding academic preparations and expectations, students share various insights. One student mentioned, “I felt like we had a lot of assignments that we had to work on while we were there.” Another noted they appreciated having an agenda, but suggested improvements such as “Having an agenda was nice but maybe including instructions on where to go in the building, like a map. Like knowing how they can get internet access.” Additionally, one of the students commented on dress expectations that it would be valuable for first-year students to “Kind of what to expect for clothing. Because …I wish I had known that there was gonna be so casual during the day or that the, you know, what events I needed to dress up for. … I wouldn’t have tried on everything in my closet before I packed, you know.” All of these comments were helpful to the program faculty as they plan for communication regarding the next summer institute.

Some students had concerns about the structure of presentations and group work. One student noted that “The presentations could have been much shorter. We prefer to learn from the faculty.” A different student noted, “I know group work is important. But I want to say most of us already, maybe it should be an assumed practice that we already do it for our job. My campus is extremely collaborative.” While students’ dislike of group work is not new, faculty can be creative in structuring future group activities. For instance, students could participate in shorter group activities in the face-to-face portion of class that does not extend to the online weeks of the course that resumes after the Summer Institute ends.

Research Question 2: How do online PhD students perceive the benefits of attending an in-person Summer Institute?

In terms of benefits, two primary themes were identified (Figure 3 and Figure 4), including the “Benefits of In-person Learning” and “Personal & Professional Growth.”  The first theme, emphasized the value of face-to-face interactions for building relationships, networking, and enhancing learning experiences.

Figure 3

List of Codes for Benefits Theme 1 

Students shared a lot about the value of connections and community-building. One student shared, “I think the in-person format is just enough to kind of build camaraderie, both with the professors and the students. So, we feel like we have a little bit of community, because most of us are kind of scattered.” The feeling of being scattered is due to the online nature of the program; students are from various geographic locations and time zones. A second participant shared, “I think it opened a lot of connections. It opened a lot of doors, being able to meet face to face with people is the easiest way for me to build those connections.” While students can build connections in the online environment, one student shared being inspired by those connections in ways she was not before, “I’m really good at having these moment conversations and connecting with people and getting it, you know, exchanging that information, but I’m not as good as taking that next step and saying, oh, we should connect on LinkedIn. Or can I have your contact information? Or, like following up, and I feel like I’ve got a better handle on understanding this is how I do this. I need to step up my LinkedIn game.”

The in-person interactions positively impacted pace and energy. One student remarked, “So it definitely makes you pick up your pace. You learn so much in those kinds of conversations, yeah, and they move faster in person than they do through Zoom.” Another added, “Even if we had all those guest speakers online, it’s not quite the same energy.” Many noted that the connections made at the Summer Institute propelled their academic work forward, with one student stating that the institute helped to “define my pathway and kind of how I need to get to the finish line.” Others appreciated the time to give their academics their full attention. As one student observed, “But the beauty of the Summer Institute is it does kind of force you to put this first, at least for the few days that we’re here and allow you to concentrate more because you’re not as distracted with job, home, kids, whatever. So, I think in that case, you’re more tapped in, and you’re more receptive to the other things.”

Figure 4

List of Codes for Benefits Theme 2 

The second theme, “Personal & Professional Growth,” highlighted how the Summer Institute contributed to students’ academic and career development. One student reflected, “Well, before I went to the Summer Institute, I really hadn’t thought much about publishing. And now I want to, I have a different zest for it. I don’t know why, but I guess I was just more piqued by different people and then talking to other students that are wanting to start publishing.” Additionally, another participant shared, “I had the opportunity to share ideas with colleagues and it also helped me to refine the direction of my dissertation topic. And that happened really quickly. Just, you know, from listening to my peers in the different stages they are in their process, and then listening to the guidance and insight from the faculty really helped to kind of bring together thoughts.” Furthermore, one student remarked, “I’m definitely doing a lot more critical reading, reading for content. So academically, that’s something that I am doing.” Another added, “Yeah, I think the other thing is, knowing the hidden curriculum and the steps that I needed to get there, I left like, okay, here’s what I have to do, here’s where I need to be. And that was really, really reassuring to me, personally.”

Transitioning to the theme of overcoming imposter syndrome, many students reported significant progress. One student shared, “I often suffer from imposter syndrome. I really question whether I should be doing this? Whether I have the background knowledge, the ability to do this. So, on a personal level, I think it made me feel better about my ability to get through this program.” Another student echoed this sentiment, saying, “I think just the journey of seeing everybody kind of in the same boat, and it kind of helps you feel like, okay, we can do this. We I guess you always feel like an imposter. And then you look at everybody around you, we all feel like imposters. And so, in a way, it encourages you to keep going, because everybody else is feeling the same, I guess.” Similarly, one student described their experience, “I had a lot of anxiety coming, because I definitely have that imposter syndrome that like I’m really not smart enough, and eventually one of you guys are going to find out.”

Shifting focus to the professional relevance of the program, students also noted its impact on their careers. One student remarked, “So I was just talking with my president at my college yesterday and talking about that transformative piece, like especially for the program evaluation course. We’re in the middle of that right now at work. Now I understand better what that work needs to be so I felt like it was very applicable to my work life right now.” Another student shared, “It helps me see what my workload could be in the future. As I look forward to, you know, potential leadership roles and that sort of thing.” Finally, a student highlighted their expanded knowledge, stating, “I have learned a lot more about community college. I have learned more about the systems within it, the moving pieces and the parts and how they connect.”

Research Question 3: What improvements do online PhD students suggest for future in-person summer institutes to better support learning and overall experience?

Students’ responses focusing on improvements are organized across three main themes: duration and preparations (Figure 5), overall experience (Figure 6), and accommodation and amenities (Figure 7). Each theme includes specific comments and suggestions from participants to enhance the program’s effectiveness and satisfaction.

Figure 5

List of Codes for Improvements Theme 1 

Historically, Summer Institute was two weeks long and the program invited students to stay in dorms on campus. Given that the students are college leaders and aspiring executive leaders, this year, the program leaders condensed the Summer Institute to be eight days rather than 14 and got a group rate on a hotel across the street from the classrooms rather than across campus in dorms. Including the interview questions to answer Research Question 3 was to help us determine how students felt about these significant changes. The study identified three themes related to suggested improvements. The first, “Summer Institute Duration & Preparations,” focused on the preference for a condensed eight-day format and the need for better preparation before the event. One student commented, “I am very glad that it was eight days, two weeks would be really hard to manage with work.”

Figure 6

List of Codes for Improvements Theme 2

The second improvement theme, “Enhancing Overall Experience,” included suggestions for modifying the curriculum. A participant suggested, “I think a way of teaching case studies is my favorite way to learn.”

Figure 7

List of Codes for Improvements Theme 3 

The third theme, “Accommodation & Amenities,” addressed the physical comfort and logistics of the event. Students reported that the classrooms were too cold and that they would have appreciated coffee in the classrooms since class was all day, “If you guys don’t mind investing in some ways to have a coffee pot. We can bring our own stuff.” And “Everything was clean, the building is really nice. I would have liked to have had a coffee machine in the classrooms. I brought my k cups, but no machine.” Students appreciated the hotel setting, with one saying, “Some things a hotel provided that a dormitory could not like some amenities (microwave/fridge in the room, free breakfast).” However, there were suggestions for improvement, such as “I would have liked to be seated in a U or a square rather than seeing backs of heads in rows. For the types of discussions we have in class, it would have been nice to see each other, you know, more like a community having a conversation.”

Discussion of Findings and Recommendations for Administrators

The results of this study offer valuable insights into the experiences of online PhD students attending an eight-day face-to-face Summer Institute that serves as residency. The challenges identified, particularly in balancing work, personal life, and academic responsibilities, highlight the unique pressures faced by these non-traditional doctoral students. However, the reported benefits, such as enhanced networking opportunities, improved learning experiences, and personal and professional growth, suggest that the face-to-face component plays a crucial role in the overall educational experience when seeking to obtain a PhD. Many students discussed feeling like imposters and being unsure if they should be in the program. The students’ feedback on overcoming imposter syndrome and gaining confidence in their academic abilities is particularly noteworthy. It speaks to the transformative potential of such intensive in-person experiences.

The suggested improvements, including the preference for a condensed format and enhanced pre-event communication, provide actionable feedback for program administrators. Additionally, insights suggest that bringing first- and second-year students together prior to the Summer Institute to share advice and wisdom in an online session could be valuable. These findings underscore the importance of carefully designed hybrid learning experiences that combine the flexibility of online education with the rich interpersonal dynamics of face-to-face interactions. Future research could explore the long-term impact of such intensive in-person components on student retention, academic performance, and career outcomes in online PhD programs.

Given that nearly all participants mentioned imposter syndrome or feelings of inadequacy, this finding underscores a critical need for intervention by academic administrators. Recognizing the prevalence of this issue, administrators can implement targeted activities designed to boost confidence and provide positive, supportive messaging. Intentional activities, such as workshops focused on self-efficacy and resilience, can help students recognize and challenge their imposter feelings. Confidence boosters, including mentorship programs and opportunities for peer support, allow students to share their experiences and receive validation from others who understand their journey. Positive, supportive messaging from faculty and administrators can reinforce students’ accomplishments and potential, helping to diminish feelings of inadequacy. It is crucial for administrators to implement these interventions early in the student’s entry into the online program and to continue them frequently throughout their academic journey. By fostering an environment where achievements are celebrated and challenges are normalized, administrators can significantly mitigate the impact of imposter syndrome, thereby enhancing doctoral students’ overall academic experience and success.

One significant finding is the importance of building a strong sense of community among online students. Administrators can facilitate this by organizing virtual social events, study groups, and discussion forums where students can connect and support one another. Another key finding is the need for flexible and accessible academic support services. This includes offering virtual tutoring, writing centers, and academic advising sessions at various times to accommodate different schedules and time zones. Ensuring that these services are easily accessible and well-publicized can significantly assist students in managing their academic responsibilities. The study highlights the benefits of clear and consistent communication from faculty and administrators. Regular updates, transparent grading practices, and timely feedback help students feel informed and valued. Administrators should also encourage faculty to be approachable and available for virtual office hours, providing additional support and guidance.

To put these findings into action, administrators can start by conducting surveys or focus groups to understand their student populations’ specific needs and preferences. Based on this data, they can develop a comprehensive plan that includes the aforementioned strategies. Additionally, providing training for faculty and staff on best practices for online education and student support can ensure that the entire team is equipped to meet students’ needs effectively. By proactively addressing these findings, administrators can create a more inclusive, supportive, and effective online learning environment, ultimately leading to improved student satisfaction and success. 

Conclusion

This study underscores the transformative power of face-to-face interactions, especially in an era where online learning predominates. Students benefit from real-time discussions, forge meaningful connections, and immerse themselves in a dynamic learning environment. Despite the challenges, such as physical and mental demands and potential geographical or financial barriers, the institute’s impact is profound. It deepens students’ understanding, helps develop essential skills, and offers valuable insights from field experts. The sense of camaraderie and networking opportunities further enhance their academic and professional growth. This experience emphasizes the importance of integrating in-person components into online programs, highlighting the vital role of human connection in education. It contributes to student motivation, engagement, and retention, and opens a dialogue on enriching online education with real-world interactions. As educational landscapes evolve, insights from the Summer Institute can inform strategies for student support and engagement in distance learning, reinforcing the interplay between digital and in-person educational experiences.

References

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.

Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin.

Clapper, T. C. (2018). Capitalizing on the most important part of a learning session: The experience. Simulation & Gaming, 49(1), 3-7. https://doi.org/10.1177/104687811875

Cohodes, S., H, H., Huffaker, E., & Robles, S. C. (2024). Residential versus online? Experimental evidence on diversifying the STEM pipeline.” AEA Papers and Proceedings, 114, 507–511. https://doi.org/10.1257/pandp.20241016

Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124-130.

Ellis, J., Arnone, M., Levinson, N., & Cogburn, D. L. (2014, January). Evaluating the role of face-to-face residencies in cross-national, accessible cyberlearning. In 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 62-71). IEEE.

Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

Gardner, M. E., Bodiya, E. C., & Subramanian, S. (2021). Remote learning barriers and opportunities for graduate student and postdoctoral learners in career and professional skill development: A case study. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 22(1).. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2451

Keengwe, J., & Wilsey, B. B. (2012). Online graduate students’ perceptions of face-to-face classroom instruction. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 8(3), 45-54.

Lively, C. L., Blevins, B., Talbert, S., & Cooper, S. (2021). Building community in online professional practice doctoral programs. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 6(3), 21-29. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2021.187

Melián, E., Reyes, J. I., & Meneses, J. (2023). The online PhD experience: A qualitative systematic review. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 24(1), 137-158. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v24i1.6780

Peacock, S., Cowan, J., Irvine, L., & Williams, J. (2020). An exploration into the importance of a sense of belonging for online learners. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(2), 18–35. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i5.4539

Richtarek, A., Bennett, V., Carkin, R., Zastavker, Y. V., Harteveld, C., & Abdoun, T. (2022). Assessing in-Person versus remote learning gains: An endeavor to extend the engineering education environment. In Geo-Congress 2022 (pp. 525-533). https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784484067.05

Woo, B., Evans, K., Wang, K., & Pitt-Catsouphes, M. (2021). Online and hybrid education in a social work PhD program. Journal of Social Work Education, 57(1), 138-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1661921

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage Publications.

Young, S., Kelder, J. A., & Crawford, J. (2020). Doctoral employability: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 3(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2020.3.s1.5