The Cohort Model with Graduate Student Learners: Faculty-Student Perspectives

The cohort approach, a model whereby a group of students proceeds through an academic program together, is not a new phenomenon in the field of adult learning. Maher (2004) related that this educational format has been used in higher education since the 1940s. Yerkes, Basom, Norris, and Barnett (1995) noted that the cohort concept--"after lying nearly dormant for several years" (p. 3)--has resurfaced in at least one specific area: school leadership preparation programs. Overall, the design is aimed at attracting adult learners aged 25 and older, many of whom are employed full time and interested in a part-time program (Maher, 2004). The purpose of this article is to aid adult educators who may be considering the implementation of a graduate-level cohort approach. The intent is not to determine the superiority or inferiority of this approach compared to the traditional model of class enrollment that varies from course to course. It is also important to note that both student contributors to this article experienced the cohort orientation for either the entirety or vast majority of their graduate education. We recognize that differences likely exist among various cohort programs in graduate education (i.e., weekday vs. weekend cohort programs) and that facilitator and student perspectives vary as well. Furthermore, we also acknowledge that our reactions to the cohort approach are simply anecdotal. Nonetheless, given the paucity in the adult education literature on this topic, it is believed that this article represents a contribution to adult learning. The Cohort Model: A Summary from the Literature Cohorts in higher education are typically defined as a group of students who begin a program of study together, share the same sequence of classes, faculty members, and instructional activities toward completion of a specific degree or certification (Merino, Muse, & Wright, 1994). Recently, this definition has expanded to include the development of collaborative projects, self-directed goals, and a network of academic and social support (Merino et al., 1994). As the model increases in popularity, interest has arisen regarding the effect of this model on students' personal and professional development. Yerkes et al. (1995) described three types of cohorts: a) closed or pure, whereby students take all coursework together in a prearranged order; b) open or mixed, whereby students take a core set of courses together and then enroll in additional coursework to fulfill their needs; and c) fluid or course-by-course, whereby students may enter the cohort at various times instead of only one point of entry. In their study of U.S. universities implementing cohort programs, they found that a quarter of the institutions used more than one type of cohort. Over 70% of institutions indicated the use of closed cohorts, while over 60% of responding universities reflected the utilization of open cohorts. The use of the cohort learning model began to be used more often during the 1980s as a response to pressure for reform of the educational system (Yerkes, Norris, Basom, & Barnett, 1994). Many institutions began to investigate the academic, social, and collegial advantages of this design. Furthermore, in an effort to foster group interactions among adult learners, institutions and organizations implemented various educational formats, including accelerated classes, collaborative learning, learning communities, and team learning. Though differences exist among these specific approaches, each of them can be used within a cohort-based model (Saltiel & Russo, 2001). Despite this renewed interest in the use of cohort models, limited systematic, empirical data exist on this model. Cohort Teaching and Learning: Our Perspectives From our experience, two themes have been noted in our instructor and student perspectives of a cohort model. First, course facilitation is different in a cohort model than a traditional approach. …