• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
CPED framework in the online environment
 

CPED framework in the online environment

on

  • 294 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
294
Views on SlideShare
156
Embed Views
138

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

2 Embeds 138

http://cpedinitiative.org 132
http://www.cpedinitiative.org 6

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    CPED framework in the online environment CPED framework in the online environment Presentation Transcript

    • CPED Framework in the Online Environment Fall 2013
    • Goals for the Session  Understand the challenges of developing scholarly practitioners through online programs  Reflect on the challenges of incorporating the CPED principles/framework into highly structured online programs  Develop strategies to deal with traditional college structures, faculty, and students when trying to change the traditional  Reflect on the value of the CPED framework to the “quality” discussion of online education
    • TTU and CPED  Second wave CPED member  Have PI’s for both the Higher Ed and Educational Leadership programs  We are incorporating parts of CPED framework into all of our programs (Ed.D., Ph.D., and M.Ed.)
    • HIED Doctoral Program Enrollments (N = 157) Ed.D. - Onsite 4% Ph.D. 28% Ed.D. - Online 68%
    • Trademark Outcome of Ed.D. Graduates of the Ed.D. in Higher Education Administration will be scholarly practitioners, change agents, and influencers with the skills and competencies to name, frame, and solve problems of practice, using empirical evidence to evaluate impact (principles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6). Understanding the importance of equity and social justice (principle 1), they use applied theories and practical research as tools of collaborative change (principles 2, 5, 6).
    • Characteristics of Culture/Administration  University sees online as a way to reach 40,000 students  Supportive Dean who is reforming the College of Education  College as a whole does not fully embrace or understand distance learning
    • Characteristics of Faculty  Two assistant and one associate professors  Added two new assistant professors in fall 2013  Faculty to student ratio if everyone had equal loads – about 1:32  Heavy reliance on adjuncts (practitioners)
    • Characteristics of Students  All work full time  Are required to be currently working in a higher education institution and must be in a professional position  Require a minimum of three years professional experience in higher education or similar leadership experien ce
    • Program Overview  Was purposefully created for online delivery to serve needs in the state of Texas  It is a 60 hour degree (above master’s) completed in 3 years (including master’s work = 90 hours) • 2 years of intensive coursework • 1 year – thematic problem-based dissertation working with external collaborative partner (higher education institutions)  30 hours of graduate-level work is accepted from the master’s
    • Program Overview  Students are enrolled once a year in a cohort  Normally admit 15 – 20 per year; fall 2013 – admitted 3 cohorts  Have them separate into two foci: • Community college administration • Four-year college/university administration
    • Program Overview  There are no substitutions for the 60 required hours of coursework (prescribed)  Students complete 21 credit hours per year, six (6) in the fall term, six (6) in the spring term, and nine (9) hours across the summer for two years; third year is dissertation  Three (3) mandatory one (1) week summer professional development sessions are required in Lubbock, TX the first three years of the program
    • Program Overview  Program courses are sequenced in three phases • Phase 1 – knowledge level • Phase 2 – hypothetical practice • Phase 3 – authentic practice  Evaluation occurs at the end of each course and at the end of each phase  Remediation occurs as needed  Formal evaluations by the full-time faculty of each student’s progress occur each year
    • Program Overview  Field-based internships incorporated into most courses – using the concept of students’ institutions as “laboratories of practice” (principles 2, 3, & 4)  Traditional qualifying examination process (though take home)  Pseudo-themed Dissertations of Practice • Problem identified within a higher education institution – preferably one that is affecting many throughout the state • Collaborative partner sits on dissertation committee
    • Challenges – Traditional Administrative Structures/Culture  Do not see that multiple cohorts of students at different stages in the process need to be “managed”  Adherence to traditional policies and tenure structures; faculty are not recognized for the “extra” time and effort they are putting into the initiative  University and College are counting on us to generate head count
    • Challenges – Faculty  Asking faculty to do more while rewarded under      traditional measures Faculty are not required to train to be online teachers Course quality is inconsistent No instructional design help to produce courses that are consistent across the board No policies to standardize program expectations Not all faculty are “practitioners” and their approach diminishes the application of content
    • Challenges – Faculty  This summer we had 14 students complete qualifying examinations at the same time – faculty nightmare (and it was in the summer)  Two faculty are working with the 14 students on dissertations  Each faculty member has a different process and expectations  The College of Education is not ready to look at managing this program outside of the traditional norms of consensus on everything
    • Challenges – Students  New student application process is not stringent enough • University wants graduate students – everyone looks good on paper  Students work more than full time  Very busy – taking 6 (fall), 6 (spring), and 9 (summer) credit hours – leaves limited time to “engage”  Difficult to remediate a student that is not local
    • Challenges – Students  Students struggle with writing at the appropriate levels  Students are not prepared to conduct research – but reformed program is designed to fix this through periodic remediation  Students falling out of cohort sequence due to life events  Student falling out of cohort sequence due to failing qualifying exams
    • Challenges – Curriculum  One year dissertation is extremely time consuming and takes a tremendous amount of faculty time  Faculty are not on the same page of the process of completing a dissertation  Collaborative partners are willing to help now – but for how long?
    • Challenges - Curriculum  Class projects use “laboratories of practice” • Students must use their institutions as their laboratories  Challenges with this are: • Difficult to supervise students on their projects at a distance • Relying on partners at the institution to give their time and access to authentic situations • Students do not like to get outside their departments • Students do work full time and these projects are time intensive
    • Challenges – Dissertation in Practice  TTU does not currently support “group dissertation” concept  Normally, the program follows the traditional dissertation format of 5 chapters  The online Ed.D.’s first cohort is doing pseudothematic dissertations  Problems of practice were identified through the program faculty by working with area community colleges
    • Challenges - Dissertation  First cohort in the program is 13 students spread across Texas and 1 in Michigan  Students are having difficulty in staying together as a group  Groups are not using their support-system from cohort as we had hoped • It has become an everyone for him or herself mentality  We have insufficient number of faculty to spend the amount of time necessary to get these students through in a year
    • Challenges - Dissertation  We are seeing evidence that completing a dissertation at a distance is very isolating  Have now moved to allowing students to work on a problem at their institution • Difficult to get students to think in context of “broad problem” in the field
    • Challenges - Quality  Not all faculty expect the same rigor  Not all students admitted should be in an accelerated program  Challenging to incorporate “laboratories of practice” throughout the curriculum and ensure the projects have merit and are rigorous – and that students are prepared to deliver to the partner institutions
    • Session Activity
    • Activity Logistics  If numbers permit – divide into four equal groups (might want to align based on focus K-12 focus; higher ed focus)  Each group will address the questions provided (will be provided on a hand-out and on the next slide)  Use chart paper and markers – reflect on the questions as a group and be ready to report out
    • Questions to be Addressed  How do traditional culture/administrative structures challenge innovation in incorporating the CPED framework/principles into distance programs?  How does the faculty role change in a CPED-reformed online program? How do we incentivize for workload and innovation?
    • Questions to be Addressed  What are the challenges of ensuring student success in an online CPED-reformed program?  What are the challenges of getting students through the Dissertation of Practice – online?  How can we use the CPED principles to “redefine” the distance quality stereotype?
    • Wrap-up Questions
    • Contact Information Dr. Stephanie J. Jones, Ed.D. Texas Tech University Associate Professor Higher Education Program Coordinator stephanie.j.jones@ttu.edu