A practitioner is often regarded as an individual who is involved in practicing something, which could be a technique, profession or an occupation. Practitioners have to focus on theory-based models in order to carry out their functions of practice in an effective manner. At this context, a practitioner is taken to be the one involved in practicing a profession. Practitioners emerge from scholars. At a closer perspective, a scholar is an erudite or learned individual who possesses profound knowledge within a specific or known subject. This leads to an understanding of a scholar-practitioner as one professional experience that is ideal motivated by ethical conducts, political commitments, and personal values, informed by the various sources of experimental knowledge, and grounded on research and theory (McClintock, 2012). This comprises of all professional and educational demands of the society. In contrast, practitioner-scholar is regarded as an individual who has the ability of integrating professional and clinical experience with scientific and academic research and empirically based knowledge.
At the moment, scholar-practitioner model describes me best since it provides a conceptual framework, which I use in my education program. Scholar-practitioner model applies since it provides a conceptual learning framework. As a profession, this model ensures that all programs takes place based on scholarly literature, best practices, and students are able to attend their fieldwork on time. This includes conduction of service activities, research, and teaching (Tenkasi, & Hay, 2004). As a student, the model applies since it mentors one to focus on investigating various essential practical problems, working with various practitioners in order to test research results and implement them within the context of education field, and distributing research findings to multiples of audience from different locations.
I plan to become a scholar-practitioner by ensuring that I embrace the elements of the scholar-practitioner model. Commitment is one of the elements of this model. In this, I focus on involving myself actively in academia knowledge and being dedicated towards attainment of excellence. Leadership is another requirement of the model where I focus on leading in academic integrity, ethics, and influencing others within the professional and theoretical breakthroughs, which are essential for future generations. Moreover, I am geared towards taking several challenges on academic fields and theories. Further, I am ready to integrate application and research in the academic field and engaging myself effectively in the experimentation process. I do recognize that sacrifices are needed in this model (Hopkins, 2010). As such, I have set myself ready to sacrifice effectively bearing in mind that time restraints exist. This will contribute towards making me think as a leader, as well as become an expert within my academic field. In addition, I will develop a scholarly thinking, which will guide me during my academic research and application.
At master’s-level learning, scholar-practitioner model is focused at creating relationships between theory and research. This involves conducting various experiments in order to establish the relationships, which exist between theory and research. In contrast, at doctoral-level learning, the model is focused at testing of theory and research. This includes investigation of the sources of knowledge and obtaining findings, which are analyzed at a critical perspective. Further, at doctoral-level learning, the model is more focused towards testing of knowledge, which is obtained from research and theory. This includes establishing of why theory and research relationships exist. Methods used in testing and creation of knowledge are investigated in order to quantify obtaining such new knowledge in society. This indicates that at doctoral-level learning the model is more based on acquisition of scholarship skills, which involves integration of the artistic and qualitative methods in research methods and designs, as well as sampling in order to make judgments on effects and causes.
At master’s level, the model identifies challenges, which one may experience in the process of conducting research. The skills obtained at this level are mainly practice skills, which are applied in particular professions. In contrast, at doctoral-level the model provides an opportunity for a scholar to provide ethical, societal, and economic challenges, which one encounters during the process of knowledge development and research. The skills obtained at doctoral-level are applicable to various degrees of different disciplines.
At this degree, I am more focused at sacrificing a lot in research work. This includes developing a positive attitude towards behavioral, personal, and cognitive attributes, which will contribute significantly towards my personal development. Further, I focus on developing excellent intellectual capacities, which guide me towards becoming an excellent problem-solver. This includes depicting higher levels of emotional intelligence at differentiated and unified settings and across various roles. Moreover, I will be commitment in my research work and illustrate great ambiguity and difference tolerance, which enable me to develop behavioral dimensions, which are needed for scholar-practitioners. In addition, I am more focused at nurturing wisdom capacity, which is the main education goal that aids in observable and abstract questioning of overlooked and for granted matters, simplifying interpretations, and working with unexpected findings to obtain the desired results.
Hopkins, P. (2010). “Practitioner Know Thyself! Reflections On The Importance Of Self
Work For Diversity And Social Justice Practitioners.” TAMARA: Journal Of Critical Postmodern Organization Science, 8(3/4), 157-171.
McClintock, C. (2012). Encyclopedia of Distributed Learning: Scholar Practitioner Model.
SAGE Publications, Inc.
Tenkasi, R, & Hay, G. (2004). “Actionable Knowledge and Scholar-Practitioners: A Process
Model of Theory-Practice Linkages,” Systematic Practice and Action Research, Vol. 17, No. 3.