Establishing Rigor and Quality in Doctoral Programs Through Program Assessment

Authors

  • Maida Finch Salisbury University
  • Jake D. Follmer University of West Virginia
  • Heather Porter Salisbury University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2021.171

Keywords:

program assessment, student learning, continuous improvement

Abstract

This essay describes the development and implementation of a CPED-grounded program assessment system and the ways in which it contributes to quality assurance in Ed.D. programs broadly. We begin by articulating program quality and describing the contextual factors that guide our approach to program assessment. Next, we overview major components and processes of our program assessment system. Specific emphasis is placed on describing the development and evaluation of program effectiveness based on CPED-influenced student learning outcomes. We then briefly describe how we leverage an existing learning management system to implement program assessment efficiently, and outline continuous monitoring and improvement efforts that are based on our program assessment work. Finally, we describe our experiences with academic program review and discuss lessons learned and suggestions to promote program rigor and success.

Author Biography

Maida Finch, Salisbury University

Associate Professor and Department Chair, Literacy Studies

References

Bogue, E. G. (1998). Quality assurance in higher education: The evolution of systems and design ideals. New Directions for Institutional Research, 99(99), 7-18. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.9901

Bonvillian, G., & Dennis, T. L. (1995). Total quality management in higher education: Opportunities and obstacles. In S. J. Simms & R. R. Simms (Eds.), Total quality management in higher education: Is it working? (pp. 37-50). Praeger Publishers.

Bowker, L. (2017). Aligning accreditation and academic program reviews: a Canadian case study. Quality Assurance in Education, 25(3), 287-302. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-11-2016-0061

Brooks, R. L., & Heiland, D. (2007). Accountability, assessment and doctoral education: Recommendations for moving forward. European Journal of Education, 42(3), 351-362. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2007.00311.x

Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate. (2019). Guiding principles for program design. https://www.cpedinitiative.org/the-framework

Denecke, D., Kent, J., & McCarthy, M. T. (2017). Articulating learning outcomes in doctoral education. Council of Graduate Schools.

Ewell, P. (2010). Twenty years of quality assurance in higher education: What’s happened and what’s different? Quality in Higher Education, 16(2), 173-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2010.485728

Felten, P. (2013). Principles of good practice in SoTL. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 1(1), 121-125.

Hakkola, L., & King, J. A. (2016). A developmental approach to graduate education review: A new take on a traditional process. Innovative Higher Education. 41, 137-152. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-015-9338-3

Harvey, L., & Knight, P. T. (1996). Transforming higher education. Society for Research in Higher Education & Open University Press. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED418640

Koslowski, F. A. (2006). Quality and assessment in context: A brief review. Quality Assurance in Education, 14(3), 277-288. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880610678586

Kuh, G. D., & Ewell, P. T. (2010). The state of learning outcomes assessment in the United States. Higher Education Policy and Management, 22(1). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/hemp-22-5ks5dlhqbfr1

Mårtensson, K., Roxå, T., & Stensaker, B. (20014). From quality assurance to quality practices: An investigation of strong microcultures in teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 39(4), 534-545. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2012.709493

McKenny, P., & Anderson, C. (2019). Quality with integrity: Working in partnership to conduct a program review. International Journal for Students as Partners, 3(2), 27-43. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v3i2.3757

National Commission on the Future of Higher Education. (2006). A test of leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher Education. U.S. Department of Education.

Openo, J. A., Laverty, C., Kolomitro, K., Borin, P., Goff, L., Stranach, M., & Gomaa, N. (2017). Bridging the divide: Leveraging the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning for quality enhancement. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2017.2.6

Shulman, L. S., Golde, C. M., Bueschel, A. C., Kristen, J., Shulman, L. S., Golde, C. M., Bueschel, A. C., & Garabedian, K. J. (2016). Reclaiming education’s doctorates: A critique and a proposal. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 25-32. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0013189X035003025

Tagg, J. (2010). The learning‐paradigm campus: From single‐to double‐loop learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 123(119), 51-61. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl

Downloads

Published

2021-10-19

How to Cite

Finch, M., Follmer, J. D., & Porter, H. (2021). Establishing Rigor and Quality in Doctoral Programs Through Program Assessment. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 6(4), 40–47. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2021.171

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 4 (2021)

Section

Essays

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.