Improvement Science as a Frame for the Dissertation in Practice: The Johns Hopkins Experience

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2022.241

Keywords:

Applied Dissertation, Dissertation in Practice, Improvement Science, Scholar Practitioner

Abstract

The Johns Hopkins University Doctor of Education program was developed with the expressed program outcome of developing leaders who possess the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to rigorously examine educational problems of practice with stakeholders within their context of professional practice using a social justice lens. The purpose of this article is to describe how improvement science principles depicted by Bryk et al. (2015) served as a frame for our Applied Dissertation to support scholar-practitioners to partner with their colleagues in educational institutions and to independently take on the challenges and opportunities they will encounter in their future work. We outline the dissertation through a discussion of these principles and provide four examples of the resulting dissertations and their impact on the scholar-practitioner’s context of professional practice and on them as educational leaders.

Author Biography

Stephen J. Pape, Johns Hopkins University

Dr. Stephen Pape is Professor of Education and Co-Director of the Johns Hopkins University (JHU) Doctor of Education program. Dr. Pape previously held Associate Professor positions at the University of Florida (2006-2012) where he served as Mathematics Education Coordinator and The Ohio State University (1998-2006). He received his doctorate with a focus in Educational Psychology from the City University of New York following serving as a middle school mathematics and science teacher in New York City. His research focuses on technology-enhanced classroom contexts that foster mathematical understanding and the development of strategic behaviors.

References

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994). Ecology models of human development. In T. N. Postlewaite & T. Husen (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (2nd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 1643-1647). Elsevier.

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The biological model of human development. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 793-828). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0114

Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LaMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America's schools can get better at getting better. Harvard Education Press.

Cabrera, D., & Cabrera, L. (2015). Systems thinking made simple: New hope for solving wicked problems. (2nd ed.). Plectica Publishing.

Cabrera, D., Cabrera, L., & Powers, E. (2015). A unifying theory of systems thinking with psychosocial applications. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 32(5), 534-545. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2351

Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (n. d.). The CPED Framework. https://www.cpedinitiative.org/the-framework

Danielson, C. (2013). The 2013 Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument. Charlotte Danielson.

Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181-199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140

Farrell, T. S. C., & Ives, J. (2015). Exploring teacher beliefs and classroom practices through reflective practice: A case study. Language Teaching Research, 19(5), 594-610. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814541722

Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching, 8(3), 381-391. https://doi.org/10.1080/135406002100000512

Miles, M.B., Huberman, A. M., and Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage Publications, Inc.

Neal, J. W., & Neal, Z. P. (2013). Nested or networked? Future directions for ecological systems theory. Social Development, 22(4), 722-737. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12018

Ng, P. T., & Tan, C. (2009). Community of practice for teachers: Sensemaking or critical reflective learning?. Reflective Practice, 10(1), 37-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940802652730

Perry, J. A., Zambo, D., & Crow, R. (2020). The improvement science dissertation in practice: A guide for committee members, and their students. Myers Education Press.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner-how professionals think in action. The Basic Books, Inc.

Downloads

Additional Files

Published

2022-01-14 — Updated on 2022-11-17

How to Cite

Pape, S. J., Bryant, C. L., JohnBull, R. M., & Karp, K. S. (2022). Improvement Science as a Frame for the Dissertation in Practice: The Johns Hopkins Experience. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 7(1), 59–66. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2022.241

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 1 (2022): Evolution of the Dissertation in Practice

Section

Themed - DiP

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Stephen J. Pape, Camille L. Bryant, Ranjini Mahinda JohnBull, Karen S. Karp

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International 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.