Upload
cpedinitiative
View
694
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Dissertation in Practice (DiP):
Rhetoric, Reality, and the Data
The Dissertation in PracticeAwards Committee
Val Storey
Micki Caskey
Bryan Maughan
Jim Marshall
Amy Wells Dolan
Nancy Shanklin
Kristina Hesbol
Cheri C. Magill
University of Central Florida
Portland State University
University of Idaho
CSU Fresno
University of Mississippi
University of Colorado–Denver
University of Denver
Virginia Commonwealth
Session Outline
Introductions-DiP Awards Committee
1. Background2. DiP Committee 2013-2014, Findings3. DiP Challenge4. Interactive Session5. Recommendations
1. Background
Development of CPED Principles & DiP Assessment Criteria
1. The Evolution of CPED Principles
Palo Alto, June 2009, Duquesne University
The goal: Come to consensus on the definition of a Professional Practice Doctorate degree (EdD) and the central principles that should guide all programs
Consortium members agreed upon Working Principles for Professional Practice Doctorate Programs, to be tested during CPED Phase II.
Perry, J., & Imig, D. (2010) Final Report: The
Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate
2007-2010
The Professional doctorate in education:1. Framed around questions of equity, ethics, and social justice…2. Prepares leaders who can construct and apply knowledge to
make a positive….3. Provides opportunities for candidates to develop and demonstrate
collaboration and communication skills…4. Provides field-based opportunities to analyze problems of practice5. Is grounded in and develops a professional knowledge base that
integrates both practical and research knowledge, that links theory with systemic and systematic inquiry.
6. Emphasizes the generation, transformation, and use of professional knowledge and practice.
Ref: Perry & Imig, Final Report: The Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate 2007-2010
Working Principles
Design Concept Definition
The culminating experience that demonstrates the scholarly practitioner’s ability to solve problems of practice, the Dissertation in Practice exhibits the doctoral candidate’s ability “to think, to perform, and to act with integrity” (Shulman, 2005). Fall , 2011.
2. Evolution of DiP Assessment Criteria
June 2012, California State Univ, Fresno “Defining Criteria for a Dissertation In Practice”
Identified and ranked criteria
October 2012, The College of William and Mary DiP Award Committee
November 2012, DiP assessment criteria circulated for public comment Refined DiP assessment criteria
With that understanding in mind, the following assessment criteria for the CPED Dissertation in Practice Award ensure that CPED principles are addressed to the highest standard of scholarship and practice.
Unacceptable
Developing
Target
Exceptional
1. Demonstrates an understanding of, and possible solution to, the problem of practice.
(Indicators: Demonstrates an ability to address and/or resolve a problem of practice and/or generate new practices)
1 2 3 4
2. Demonstrates the scholarly practitioner’s ability to act ethically and with integrity.
(Indicators: Findings, conclusions and recommendations align with the data; the dissertation in practice is performed with integrity)
1 2 3 4
3. Demonstrates the scholarly practitioner’s ability to communicate effectively in writing to an appropriate audience in a way that addresses scholarly practice.
(Indicators: Style is appropriate for the intended audience)
1 2 3 4
4. Integrates both theory and practice to advance practical knowledge.
(Indicators: Integrates practical and research-based knowledge in order to contribute to practical knowledge base; Frames the study in existing research on both theory and practice)
1 2 3 4
5. Provides evidence of the potential for impact on practice, policy, and/or future research in the field.
(Indicators: Dissertation indicates how its findings are expected to impact professional field or problem)
1 2 3 4
6. Uses methods of inquiry that are appropriate to the problem of practice.
(Indicators: Identifies rationale for method of inquiry that is appropriate to the dissertation in practice; effectively uses method of inquiry to address problem of practice)
1 2 3 4
Total Score / 24
Submission RequirementsTraditional norms
Includes: Problem, purpose, research questions Theoretical/conceptual underpinnings Methods – approach, sampling, data analysis 15 pages, double-spaced including tables,
figures, and references
Submission RequirementCPED DiP Proposed Distinctions
Demonstrate ability to generate solutions for problems of practice
Summary of findings: Impact on practice Generative impact Actionable knowledge Researcher becomes change agent
Looks at implications of the solution in both local and broad contexts
Demonstrates the ability “to think, to perform, and to act with integrity” (Shulman, 2005)
The Awards Committee
2013-2014
DiP Committee’s Assessment Process
Agreed product delivery time line Blind, peer-review and scoring of DiP synopsis by
multiple reviewers Data collection – Qualtrics Discrepancies between reviewers resolved by discussion
between reviewers and chair Analysis of DiP synopses scores Narrowed pool of DiPs Blind peer-review and scoring of DiPs by entire
committee Analysis of DiP scores Selection of awardees
CPED DiP Award of the YearAnalysis
Summary 25 DiP Submissions
Phase I institutions -21 (14 submissions from three
institutions) Phase 2 institutions - 4
DiP Research Methodology 4 (16%) employ quantitative methods 17 (68%) employ qualitative methods 4 (16%) employ mixed method
Average page length was 212, with a range of 85 to 377 pages
Methodologies
Methodolgies
Action Research 10Phenomenology 1Grounded theory 3Case Study 10
QuantitativeDescriptive Statistics
8 reviewers 300 responses to criteria in rubric Item mean scores ranged from 2.78 to 2.94;
overall mean = 2.86 Median was 3 (“target”) for all items except #5,
indicating a higher potential for impact on practice
Synopsis Assessment
5 19 15 17 4 25 7 16 20 12 21 18 8 9 6 24 1 2 11 3 22 23 14 13 100
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
45
4140
39 3938
3736 36 36
3433 33 33 33
3231
30 30 3029 29
2726
25Total
Content Analysis
Traditional five chapter dissertations – 24 Non-traditional dissertations – 1 Individual authored - 25 Collaborative – 0 Implied evidence of Including stakeholders – 2 Action research methodology – 10
Action implemented – 2
Problems of Practice
“There is little research on alternative schools…” “External pressures on higher education…to teach a
diversity of students…” “Achievement gap in Hispanic students…” “The United States repeatedly ranks behind other
countries in reading and math achievement.” “My preservice teachers did not have multiple
opportunities to plan and teach math lessons in classes and in their field experience. I did not have control over [this].”
“I propose cooperative learning can increase student learning as self-efficacy, as well as course completion.”
The common factors
The common factors of the award winners Action research Problem of Practice Engaged the community Showed immediate impact
Designs that get students into the ball park of the criteria
3. DiP Challenge
CPED, Phase 2
Consortium members have committed to testing and refining these principles in collaboration with practitioners and other non/for profit stakeholders.
Perry, J., & Imig, D. (2010). Final Report: The Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate 2007-2010.
Dissertation in PracticeRather than mimic the PhD dissertation, an EdD thesis should have a distinctive form. A distinctive form is necessary for the thesis to have its own identity, to be a unique and recognizable entity. However, distinctiveness alone is insufficient. It must be a form that manifestly serves functions of the doctorate:
1. Developmental efficacy;
2. Community benefit;
3. Stewardship of doctoral values; and
4. Distinctive alternative format.
Alternatives proposed in the literature include Portfolios, Internships, Analytical Papers, Collaborative Projects, Thematic Dissertations, Problem Based Thesis (Position Paper & Action Communications), Action Based Research.
Congruent with CPED’s principles and aims of doctoral education; Value to a larger community.
Source: Archbald (2008)
Moving Toward Alternative Program Models
A growing number of programs have or are developing alternative models. Shulman (2010) supports the non-traditional format and agrees that the dissertation has great merit as a series of shorter, more varied performances, not a marathon (or traditional dissertation format) …suggests the dissertation move from being a capstone experience to one that demonstrates, or communicates, ability over a variety of performances as is practiced in other fields, such as chemistry, psychology, and economics.
International Association for Practice Doctorates
Doctorates operate in an international context and it is therefore important that countries benchmark their doctoral degrees in a global environment: to demonstrate parity of outcomes; to promote mobility; and to strengthen career opportunities for doctoral
graduates.
Key factors affecting the reputation of each country’s doctorates include: having in place adequate and rigorous quality assurance mechanisms ability to demonstrate consistency of standards of achievement across
varied programs.
International Association for Practice Doctorates (2013)
http://www.professionaldoctorates.org/index.html
Europe-Professional Practice Doctorate
UK- Fastest growing sector in doctoral education in the UK BUT Professional Doctorates are still a minority area in the sector, often misunderstood and viewed with concern by research-driven academics and senior managers at many HEI’s, including some Research Councils and funding agencies.
Mainland Europe- Few Professional Doctorates have been established and there is limited understanding of their structures and impact. The Bologna Seminar on Doctoral Programs (2006 ) concluded
that original research must remain the main component of all doctorates, no matter what their type or form, and should reflect core processes and outcomes that pass evaluation by an expert university committee with external representation.
Australia-EdD (Professional Practice Doctorate)
Aim to Prepare enhanced professionals either as leaders of the profession or
as specialized practitioners in the field; Make advancements in the field of professional practice including
development of “solutions” for practical problems in the workplace; and Develop scholarly professionals as opposed to professional scholars;
Dissertation in Practice Examine issues and problems in practice and the workplace with a
view to improvement of practice; Focus on research which is located in professional practice and which
contributes to the body of knowledge in that professional practice; and Demonstrate the practical utility of the research for the candidate’s
improvement of professional practice.
REFERENCES Bologna Seminar on “Doctoral Programmes for the European Knowledge
Society”. Salzburg, 3-5 February 2005. www.bolognaprocess.
Shulman, L. P. (2010). Doctoral education shouldn't be a marathon. Chronicle of Higher Education , B9-B12.
Trafford, V.N., & Lesham, S.( 2007). Overlooking the Conceptual Framework. Innovations . Education & Teaching International 44( 1), 93-105.
Willis, J.W., Inman, D., & Valenti, R. (2010). Completing a Professional Practice Dissertation: A Guide for Doctoral Students and Faculty . Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Useful Resources
National Network for the Directors of the Doctorate in Education
http://sites.google.com/site/eddnatnet/ International Conference on Professional Doctorates
http://www.ukcge.ac.uk/profdocs Middlesex University Institute for Work Based Learning Research
Centre
http://www.mdx.ac.uk/courses/postgraduate/Professional-practice/ iwbldprof.aspx American Educational Research Association (AERA) special
interest group on Doctoral Education across the Disciplines http://www.aera.net/SIG168/DoctoralEducationacrosstheDisciplinesSIG168/tabid/12275/Default.aspx
Interactive Session
What challenges do our programs face in moving to the DiP?
Challenges in moving from a traditional 5-chapter theoretical dissertation to a Dissertation in Practice
Defining the DiP
Challenges
Definitions Revisit criteria Outputs Publication opportunities for faculty?
What progress have you made in addressing these challenges?
Lessons learned
Recommendations