Integrates practical and research-based knowledge to contribute to practical knowledge base; Frames the study in existing research on both theory and practice. Four studies used quantitative methods, 17 used qualitative methods, and four used mixed methods. Critical reflections and subsequent comments can often appear somewhat tenuous. Re-envisioning the professional doctorate for educational leadership and higher educational leadership: Procedure Each member of the committee responded to an email invitation to complete a blind review of four DiP synopses submitted by the nominated candidate. Results indicated few changes occurred in the final product, despite evidence of change in the Dissertation in Practice process.
Figure 1 shows a frequency distribution of total scores for the 25 DiPs submitted for review. UCEA Review , 46 2 , 10— While the DiPs that rose to the top during the review process were regarded by their submitting institutions as exemplary, not all addressed all of the assessment criteria in their synopsis. Interrogation of outcomes of the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate. Lessons from innovative programs.
Examining EdD Dissertations in Practice: The Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate
Action research as signature pedagogy in an Education Doctorate program: The qualitative data confirmed the quantitative findings. The PhD versus the EdD: Peabody Journal of Education, 84 148— The impact of professional doctorates in the workplace and professions.
Building networked practic communities in education.
Teaching in Higher Education, 15 5— Re-envisioning the professional doctorate for educational leadership and higher educational leadership: Not surprisingly, the consortium has struggled to reach consensus on a DiP definition.
In their view, the difference between a PhD and a Professional Practice Doctorate is the demonstration of knowledge production that makes a significant contribution to the profession. A distinctive voice should be clearly heard although what is said should be supported by evidence. Prior to scoring, the DiP Award Committee predicted that an analysis of the score distribution might reveal a natural break that could be useful to narrow the pool for further review.
To re-imagine and redesign the EdD will require innovation, a commitment that has now been made by the growing membership of CPED, now collaborating on a global stage to rethink the fundamental purpose of doctoral education with specific focus on the professional practice doctorate, the EdD. Task force report of the professional doctora te.
The scale ranged from possible points 6 items of the survey x 4 maximum points allowed x 2 reviewers. Integrates both theory and practice to advance practical knowledge. Demonstrable evidence of how ideas have been synthesized in the light of experience and in the context of academic literature, and how this has created new knowledge.
Common to all is the emphasis on critical assessment of the originality of findings presented in the dissertation in the context of the literature and the research.
Accepted for publication in July by Dr. UCEA Review46 210— Research versus problem solving for the Education Leadership doctoral thesis: He received his Ph.
Review of this feedback led to item criteria refinement along with performance indicators:. Second, how should DiP potential impact be measured?
CPED recognizes EdD alumna’s dissertation – USC Rossier School of Education | USC
Independently construct arguments for and against the findings and use evidence to support your interpretation. Style is appropriate for the intended audience.
Daedalus, 352— The inclusion of quality data provided a point of reference to triangulate perspectives regarding the eventual five finalists. Comments on Shulman, Golde, Bueschel, and Garabedian: While the DiPs that rose to the top during the review process were regarded by their submitting institutions as exemplary, not all addressed all of the assessment criteria in their synopsis.
They disseminate work in multiple ways, with an obligation to resolve problems of practice by collaborating with key stakeholders, including the partners from schools, community, and the university. Limitations The authors of this paper are DiP Award Committee members, which could cause bias in interpretation.
They disseminate work in multiple ways, with an obligation to resolve problems of practice by collaborating with key stakeholders, including the partners from schools, community, and the university.
Educational Researcher36, — Identified as Phase II institutions, 26 new universities joined the consortium, beginning their work of EdD re-design at the fall convening held at Burlington, Vermont in