This document outlines the background and findings of the Dissertation in Practice (DiP) Awards Committee from 2013-2014. It discusses the evolution of the CPED principles and the DiP assessment criteria. It then presents the committee's process for assessing DiP submissions, including blind peer review. Key findings are that most submissions used qualitative methods, addressed problems of practice, and followed a traditional 5-chapter format. Submissions that demonstrated action research and immediate impact on practice received the highest scores. The document concludes by discussing ongoing challenges around defining alternative DiP models and ensuring quality and consistency internationally.

1. The Dissertation in
Practice (DiP):
Rhetoric, Reality, and
the Data

2. The Dissertation in Practice
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 Awards Committee
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Background
DiP Committee 2013-2014, Findings
DiP Challenge
Interactive Session
Recommendations

4. 1. Background
Development of CPED
Principles & DiP Assessment
Criteria

5. 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

6. Working Principles
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
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 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.

8. 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

9. 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.
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 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)

12. The Awards Committee
2013-2014

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 Award of 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
Phenomenology 1
Grounded theory 3
Case Study 10

16. Quantitative
Descriptive 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

18. 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

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. 3. DiP
Challenge

22. 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.

23. Dissertation in Practice
Rather 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)

24. Moving Toward
Alternative Program Models
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
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

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)
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.

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 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/DoctoralEducationacrosstheDisciplines
SIG168/tabid/12275/Default.aspx

31. Interactive Session

32. What challenges do our 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
 Revisit criteria
 Outputs
 Publication opportunities for faculty?

34. What progress have you
made in addressing these
challenges?
Lessons learned

35. Recommendations