AIL 689 was the course that turned me toward the dissertation and the comprehensive examination, and it did so by making me look backward and forward at the same time. Its central aim, preparing doctoral students in instructional technology to function as independent researchers, was realized through a weekly structure in which each lesson built deliberately on the last. More than any single topic, that progression shaped me: it exposed me, step by step, to the knowledge and expectations of an independent scholar and asked me to take ownership of my own scholarly identity. The course advanced my degree goal of completing a rigorous dissertation and my professional goal of becoming a faculty member and learning-technology researcher.
What engaged me most was developing my comprehensive examination portfolio. Before this course I had no portfolio, and assembling one forced me to revisit my previous work with real intention, to reflect on the projects and knowledge I had accumulated across courses, and to organize them into a coherent representation of my growth. Articulating my instructional technology philosophy was especially meaningful, because it gave me space to state my understanding of technology integration and connect it explicitly to learning theories such as constructivism, cognitivism, and behaviorism. Translating that thinking into concrete content on my personal website and portfolio made the work tangible and genuinely rewarding, and it strengthened practical skills in scholarly self-presentation that I will use throughout my career.
The course also sharpened my scholarly-writing and publishing literacy. Working through resources on the structure of a manuscript, moving from manuscript to article, publishing as a doctoral student, and recognizing predatory journals gave me a clearer, more strategic understanding of how scholarship actually enters the field, knowledge directly relevant to my aspiration to contribute publications and conference presentations. A pivotal activity was the research-topic analysis in which I examined a dissertation on bio-inspired design for mechanical and biomechanical applications (Domel, 2019) alongside an article on teaching and learning Life’s Principles in biomimicry design-thinking courses (Stevens et al., 2022). Comparing an engineering validation of biomimicry with an educational study of how students learn it taught me to read across the full pipeline of a research problem, from mechanism to pedagogy, and helped me locate my own interests at the intersection of emerging technology and STEM learning.
Finally, AIL 689 produced honest self-awareness about my growth as a researcher. Through my Graduate Research Assistant role I have worked with faculty inside and outside my program on technology integration, artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and learning analytics, yet the course helped me recognize that my instincts are often too broad and too ambitious. I generate many ideas but must work harder to narrow scope into a focused, manageable study, and I have learned to use faculty feedback deliberately to do so. The course also reframed my understanding of the dissertation itself, from something I once imagined as a set of committee rules and administrative hurdles into a student-driven process centered on independent inquiry. That shift in perspective is perhaps the most important thing I carried out of AIL 689, and it now shapes how I approach the road to candidacy.
References
Domel, A. G. (2019). Bio-inspired design for mechanical and biomechanical applications [Doctoral dissertation]. Harvard University.
Stevens, L., Kopnina, H., Mulder, K., & De Vries, M. (2022). Building from the bottom up: A closer look into the teaching and learning of Life’s Principles in biomimicry design thinking courses. Biomimetics, 7(4), 243.
