Reframing the Problem of Practice: Transitions in Baylor University’s Ed.D. in Learning and Organizational Change Program
Keywords:Dissertation in Practice, Problem of Practice, Education Doctorate, Organizational Change, Professional Doctorate
This article reports on the program changes that emerged from the Baylor University Ed.D. in Learning and Organizational Change program development team as we engaged as a community of practice in the organizational change process to reframe our conceptualization of the Problem of Practice dissertation. This process led to logical implications for the program course offerings and student support systems. The following article, therefore, traces these changes as they emanate out from the Problem of Practice dissertation reconfiguration, into the course sequence, and finally the student support systems. This article concludes by offering the perspective gained about this work as we engaged in the same organizational change process through which we guide our students.
Aitchison, C. (2019). Writing groups for doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education, 34(8), 905-916. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070902785580
Aitchison, C., & Guerin, C. (Eds.). (2014). Writing groups for doctoral education and beyond innovations in practice and theory. Taylor and Francis.
Anderson, V. A. (2011). Defining the EdD and PhD in education: A Delphi study [Ph.D. Dissertation, North Dakota State University]. http://search.proquest.com/docview/870825165/abstract/BE1A5203CBD84600PQ/1
Andrews, R., & Grogan, M. (2005). Form should follow function: Removing the EdD dissertation from the PhD straight jacket. Education Faculty Articles and Research, 46(2), 10-13.
Archbald, D. (2008). Research versus problem solving for the education leadership doctoral thesis: Implications for form and function. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 704-739. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X07313288
Austin, A. E., & McDaniels, M. (2006). Using doctoral education to prepare faculty to work within Boyer’s four domains of scholarship. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2006(129), 51-65. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.171
Bell, D. J., Foster, S. L., & Cone, J. D. (2019). Dissertation and theses from start to finish: Psychology and related fields (3rd Ed.). American Psychological Association.
Belzer, A., & Ryan, S. (2013). Defining the problem of practice dissertation: Where’s the practice, what’s the problem? Planning and Changing, 44(3/4), 195-207.
Brennan, M. (1998). Struggles over the definition and practice of the educational doctorate in Australia. The Australian Educational Researcher, 25(1), 71-89. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03219666
Buss, R. R., & Zambo, D. (2014). A practical guide for students and faculty in CPED-influenced programs working on an action research dissertation in practice. Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.cpedinitiative.org/resource/resmgr/Literature/ARbuss_zambo_cped_product.pdf
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. Teacher College Press.
Council of Graduate Schools. (2007). Task force report on the professional doctorate.
Creswell, J. W. (2018). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (6th ed.). Pearson.
Edwardson, S. R. (2001). Nursing education and doctoral study in the United States. In B. Green, T. W. Maxwell, & P. Shanahan (Eds.), Doctoral education and professional practice: The next generation? (pp. 85-108). Kardoorair.
Feucht, F. C., Lunn Brownlee, J., & Schraw, G. (2017). Moving beyond reflection: Reflexivity and epistemic cognition in teaching and teacher education. Educational Psychologist, 52(4), 234-241. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1350180
Gillham, J. C., Williams, N. V., Rife, G., & Parker, K. K. (2019). Problems of practice: A document analysis of education doctorate dissertations. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 4(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2019.85
Hill, M. S. (1995). Education leadership cohort models: Changing the talk to change the walk. Planning and Changing, 26(3/4), 179-189.
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse: English in a global context. Continuum.
Ivankova, N. V., & Stick, S. L. (2007). Students’ persistence in a distributed doctoral program in educational leadership in higher education: A mixed methods study. Research in Higher Education, 48(1), 93-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-006-9025-4
Killham, J. E., Stanfield, B. J., & Jette, K. (2018). The demise of the educational doctorate: Caught in the middle of programs transitioning from the EdD to the PhD. Journal of Behavioral & Social Science, 5(3), 157-169.
Lei, S., Gorelick, D., Short, K., Smallwood, L., & Wright-Porter, K. (2011). Academic cohorts: Benefits and drawbacks of being a member of a community of learners. Education, 131(3), 497-504.
Lindsay, H., Kerawalla, L., & Floyd, A. (2018). Supporting researching professionals: EdD students’ perceptions of their development needs. Studies in Higher Education, 43(12), 2321-2335. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1326025
Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2017). Conceptualizing practitioner-scholarship for educational leadership research and practice. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 12(1), 3-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775116668525
Lovitts, B. E. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: The causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study. Rowman & Littlefield.
Maher, M. A. (2004). What really happens in cohorts. About Campus, 9(3), 18-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/abc.95
Maher, M. A. (2005). The evolving meaning and influence of cohort membership. Innovative Higher Education, 30(3), 195-211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-005-6304-5
Neumann, R. (2005). Doctoral differences: Professional doctorates and PhDs compared. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27(2), 173-188. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800500120027
Norris, C. J., & Barnett, B. (1994, October 28). Cultivating a new leadership paradigm: From cohorts to communities. University Council for Educational Administration Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED387877
Olson, K., & Clark, C. M. (2009). A signature pedagogy in doctoral education: The leader–scholar community. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 216-221. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09334207
Osguthorpe, R. T., & Wong, M. J. (1993). The Ph.D. versus the Ed.D.: Time for a decision. Innovative Higher Education, 18, 47-63.
Paltridge, B. (2002). Thesis and dissertation writing: An examination of published advice and actual practice. English for Specific Purposes, 21(2), 125-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-4906(00)00025-9
Perry, J. A. (2012). What history reveals about the education doctorate. In M. M. Latta & S. Wunder (Eds.), Placing practitioner knowledge at the center of teacher education: Rethinking the policy and practice of the education doctorate (pp. 51-72). Information Age.
Perry, J. A. (Ed.). (2016). The EdD and the scholarly practitioner: The CPED path. Information Age.
Perry, J. A., & Imig, D. G. (2008). A stewardship of practice in education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 40(6), 42-49. https://doi.org/10.3200/CHNG.40.6.42-49
Perry, J. A., Zambo, D., & Crow, R. (2020). The improvement science dissertation in practice: A guide for faculty, committee members, and their students. Myers Education Press.
Rockinson-Szapkiw, A., Spaulding, L. S., & Bade, B. (2014). Completion of educational doctorates: How universities can foster persistence. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 9, 293-308. https://doi.org/10.28945/2072
Rovai, A. P., & Wighting, M. J. (2005). Feelings of alienation and community among higher education students in a virtual classroom. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(2), 97-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.03.001
Schuster, M. T. (2017). The EdD and the Scholarly Practitioner: The CPED Path. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2017.34
Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52-60.
Shulman, L. S., Golde, C., Bueschel, A., & Garabedian, K. (2006). Reclaiming education’s doctorates: A critique and a proposal. Educational Researcher, 35, 25-32. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035003025
Swan, K., Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Pelz, W., & Maher, G. (2000). Building knowledge building communities: Consistency, contact and communication in the virtual classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(4), 359-383. https://doi.org/10.2190/W4G6-HY52-57P1-PPNE
Thompson, P. (2005). Points of focus and position: Intertextual reference in PhD theses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(4), 307-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.07.006
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803932
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice. Harvard Business Review Press.
Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). Learning in a landscape of practice: A framework. In E. Wenger-Trayner, M. Fenton-O’Creevy, S. Hutchinson, C. Kubiak, & B. Wenger-Trayner (Eds.), Learning in landscapes of practice: Boundaries, identity, and knowledgeability in practice-based learning (pp. 13-30). Routledge.
How to Cite
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- 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.
- Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
- 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:
- Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- The Author represents and warrants that:
- the Work is the Author’s original work;
- the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
- the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
- the Work has not previously been published;
- the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
- the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
- 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.