Download to read offline
![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.”](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/dipcommitteepresentation-131118190038-phpapp01/75/DiP-committee-presentation-19-2048.jpg)
More Related Content
Similar to DiP committee presentation
DiP committee presentation
- 1. The Dissertation in Practice(DiP): Rhetoric, Reality, and the Data
- 2. The Dissertation inPractice Awards Committee Val Storey University of Central Florida Micki Caskey Portland State University Bryan Maughan University of Idaho Jim Marshall CSU Fresno Amy Wells Dolan University of Mississippi Nancy Shanklin University of Colorado–Denver Kristina Hesbol University of Denver Cheri C. Magill Virginia Commonwealth
- 3. Session Outline Introductions-DiP AwardsCommittee 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Background DiP Committee 2013-2014, Findings DiP Challenge Interactive Session Recommendations
- 4. 1. Background Development ofCPED Principles & DiP Assessment Criteria
- 5. 1. The Evolutionof 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
- 6. Working Principles The Professionaldoctorate 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 practice 5. 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
- 7. Design Concept Definition The culminatingexperience 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.
- 8. 2. Evolution ofDiP 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
- 9. With that understandingin 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. Ex ce pti Una Dev ccep Tar on elop tabl get al ing e 1. Demonstrates an understanding of, and possible solution to, the problem of practice. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 3. Demonstrates the scholarly practitioner’s ability to communicate effectively in writing to an appropriate audience 1 in a way that addresses scholarly practice. 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 (Indicators: Demonstrates an ability to address and/or resolve a problem of practice and/or generate new practices) 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) (Indicators: Style is appropriate for the intended audience) 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) 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) 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) Total Score
- 10. Submission Requirements Traditional norms Includes: Problem, purpose, research questions Theoretical/conceptual underpinnings Methods – approach, sampling, data analysis 15 pages, double-spaced including tables, figures, and references
- 11. Submission Requirement CPED DiPProposed 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)
- 12.
- 13. 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
- 14. CPED DiP Awardof the Year Analysis 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
- 15. Methodologies Methodolgies Action Research 10 Phenomenology1 Grounded theory 3 Case Study 10
- 16. Quantitative Descriptive Statistics 8reviewers 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
- 18. Content Analysis Traditionalfive 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
- 19. 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.”
- 20. 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
- 21.
- 22. CPED, Phase 2 Consortiummembers 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.
- 23. Dissertation in Practice Ratherthan 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)
- 24. Moving Toward Alternative ProgramModels A growing number of programs have or are developing alternative models. Shulman (2010) supports the nontraditional 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.
- 25. International Association for PracticeDoctorates 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
- 26. 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.
- 27. Australia-EdD (Professional Practice Doctorate) Aimto 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.
- 28. 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), 93105. 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.
- 29. Useful Resources National Networkfor 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/DoctoralEducationacrosstheDisciplines SIG168/tabid/12275/Default.aspx
- 31.
- 32. What challenges doour programs face in moving to the DiP? Challenges in moving from a traditional 5chapter theoretical dissertation to a Dissertation in Practice Defining the DiP
- 33. Challenges Definitions Revisitcriteria Outputs Publication opportunities for faculty?
- 34. What progress haveyou made in addressing these challenges? Lessons learned
- 35.
Editor's Notes
- #3 Valerie: Explain the purposes and goals of a convening and the differences between it and a convention.
- #5 Valerie (for people in phase 2 who don’t have the historical background)
- #6 Valerie (more of the history) Show a timeline. Grassroots involvement and timeline. Principles articulated in June. Further discussion, then in teams, principles tested in 2009. Palo Alto, June 2009, 10 principles were articulated in convening and teams went to Pittsburgh with ten principles they believed were essential to their programs.
- #7 The actual principles. Put these on the handout.
- #8 Valerie: Looking at the design concept.
- #9 Valerie (process used to develop the rubric)Critical Friends activity: “Defining Criteria for a Dissertation In Practice”Identified criteria considered essential for a high-quality DiPRanked criteria for a high-quality DiPUsing these criteria, Sharon Welty and Chris Ray developed a draft of the DiP assessment October 2012, The College of William and MaryDiP Award Committee: Shared draft of DiP assessment criteriaGathered input and feedback from CPED colleaguesNovember 2012, DiP assessment criteria circulated for public comment Refined DiP assessment criteria
- #10 CPED working principles became the framework for developing DiP assessment criteria that would be applicable across all programs.Input from consortium members over time. As the assessment principles developed discussion focused around not only differentiating from PhD dissertation assessment criteria but also traditional EdD assessment criteria.
- #11 Valerie: keep the slide put on a handout. What should be in the synopsis. Tips about how to submit and what the committee is looking for. Full Dissertation in Practice title;Statement of the study’s identified problem of practice;Dissertation in Practice format/specifications (i.e.: three article design, policy brief, evaluation, etc.)Research question(s), if applicable; Theoretical or conceptual underpinnings that situate the problem in both academic and professional practice contexts; Methods – research design/approach, sampling, data collection procedures or data sources used, and data analysis; Summary of key findings; and determined impact on practiceWhat generative impact will this work have on practice, policy, and/or future research?What impact this work might have on the future work and agendas of the scholarly practitioner?How does this work demonstrate the scholarly practitioner’s ability to solve or contribute to the solution of problems of practice?What are the implications of the solution in both local and broad contexts?How does this work demonstrate the scholarly practitioner’s ability “to think, to perform, and to act with integrity” (Shulman, 2005)?What action pieces have been, or may be, generated as a result? 15 double-spaced page synopsis of the dissertation (inclusive of any tables and/or figures) to be completed by the doctoral student(s) is required. The synopsis should include the following:
- #12 Valerie: keep the slide put on a handout. What should be in the synopsis. Tips about how to submit and what the committee is looking for. Full Dissertation in Practice title;Statement of the study’s identified problem of practice;Dissertation in Practice format/specifications (i.e.: three article design, policy brief, evaluation, etc.)Research question(s), if applicable; Theoretical or conceptual underpinnings that situate the problem in both academic and professional practice contexts; Methods – research design/approach, sampling, data collection procedures or data sources used, and data analysis; Summary of key findings; and determined impact on practiceWhat generative impact will this work have on practice, policy, and/or future research?What impact this work might have on the future work and agendas of the scholarly practitioner?How does this work demonstrate the scholarly practitioner’s ability to solve or contribute to the solution of problems of practice?What are the implications of the solution in both local and broad contexts?How does this work demonstrate the scholarly practitioner’s ability “to think, to perform, and to act with integrity” (Shulman, 2005)?What action pieces have been, or may be, generated as a result? 15 double-spaced page synopsis of the dissertation (inclusive of any tables and/or figures) to be completed by the doctoral student(s) is required. The synopsis should include the following:
- #13 Nancy: Note: a history about the committee. The number of submissions is growing. More cohorts and they are getting better at it. The number of dissertations were higher, but no more institutions. This can be a positive representation of who we are, Emphasis that this is a committee rather than an individual review process.
- #14 Nancy: Regular meetings via Skype & Adobe Connect helped to finely tune the process and calibrate the review for inter-rater reliability** QUESTION - Do you want to include the fact that we revisited the process and re-read the synopses to confirm earlier scores?
- #15 Bryan: California State-5USC-6Arizona State-3
- #16 **These data differ from the previous slide
- #17 Explanation: Descriptive statistics were calculated for each item and included the item Mean, Std Deviation, Median, and Mode. Item Means ranged from 2.78 to 2.94 with an overall Mean of 2.86. The Median was 3 (“Target”) for each of the six items and the Mode was 3 (“Target”) for all items except item #5. Across the range of 300 individual responses (2 reviewer x 25 dissertations x 6 survey items), a 1 or “Unacceptable” was selected only 4 times, and 4 or “Exceptional” was selected only 50 times. The remaining 246 responses were either a 2 (“Developing”) or 3 (“Target”) indicating some considerable restriction of range at both ends of the scale. As for measures of central tendency, the Median of 3 or “Target” and a Grand Mean of 2.86 indicate that overall reviewers found the DiPs to be near “Target” based on the review criteria.
- #18 Each dissertation synopsis was read and evaluated by two reviewers using a 6-item Likert-style survey. The survey was coded 1 to 4, with 1 indicating unacceptable, 2 developing, 3 target, and 4 exceptional. The total points of each of the two reviewers is reflected in this chart. Total points ranged from 25 to 45 with no significant natural breaks in the frequency distribution. ** QUESTION – ADD? Any synopsis whose reviewers scored more than XX difference were re-read and juried.
- #19 Bryan: Who submitted dissertations: California State-5USC-6Arizona State-3
- #20 Bryan & Katrina: What makes a DIP POP?
- #21 Revise this. Look at action research as a common element
- #22 Valerie
- #23 Valerie:
- #24 Valerie and Katrina:Alternatives proposed in the literature include portfolios, internships, analytical papers, and collaborative projects. This literature, however, goes littlebeyond exhorting for change and describing extant alternatives in a small number of programs. These exhortations and descriptions are not embeddedin a broader perspective on the role of the dissertation in doctoral education.
- #25 Valerie(**Can you support this assertion – growing umber - with data?)
- #27 There is an international conversation about what the Dissertation in Practice across the globe. It is the 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. In mainland Europe, few Professional Doctorates have been established and there is limited understanding of their structures and impact. Report-purpose - to provide an update on developments in the area of Professional Practice Doctorates .Findings:30% increase in the number of program2005-2010expansion in the range of specialized subject areas in which such programmes are available. It is clear that this diversification has lead to increasing confusion for both types of prospective consumers (students and employers)of these awards. This report argues that the time may have arrived when some simplification and standardization of the nomenclature used across the sector is called for and makes a sensible proposal for how this might be achieved.
- #29 Put on the handout.
- #32 Valerie and Nancy and Amy
- #33 What is happening that keeps us from doing the Dissertation in Practice? Institutions are running up against graduate schools to look at what a DiP should look like. Who is willing to make these changes? ProQuest is challenging and will allow non-dissertations to come into it. Some of them are more like evaluation studies and then they are never made public. One of the challenges that is keeping us from moving toward our alternative models. If it is non-traditional, how is it publicly shared. Activity: as first phase members
- #34 There will be some presentations regarding the slides in later sessions throughout the convening. ** Bryan – Perhaps this slide should be written as members present their findings from table discussions. ??
- #36 **Do we want to use this graphic to end our presentation?