Evolution of the Dissertation in Practice

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2022.267

Keywords:

Dissertation in Practice, Professional Doctorate, Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate

Abstract

This article introduces the special issue on the evolution of the dissertation in practice, presenting a brief overview of the history of the EdD cand the concerns raised over professional doctorates, that triggered efforts to redefine the education doctorate through the leading role of the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate.

References

Adams, A., Bondy, E., Ross, D., Dana, N., & Kennedy-Lewis, B. L. (2014). Implementing an online professional practice doctoral program in a PhD environment: Managing the dilemmas. Journal of School Public Relations, 35(3), 363 - 382.

Adams, A., Bondy, E., Ross, D., Dana, N., & Kennedy-Lewis, B. L. (2014). Implementing an online professional practice doctoral program in a PhD environment: Managing the dilemmas. Journal of School Public Relations, 35(3), 363-382.

Archbald, D. (2011). The emergence of the nontraditional doctorate: A historical overview. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education,129(Spring), 7-19. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace

Boyce, B. A. (2012). Redefining the EdD: Seeking a separate identity. Quest, 64(1), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2012.653260

CPED (2021). Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED). https://www.cpedinitiative.org/cped-improvement-groups

Dill, D. D., & Morrison, J. L. (1985). EdD and PhD research training in the field of higher education: A survey and a proposal. The Review of Higher Education, 8(2), 169-186. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.1985.0027

Hawkes, D., & Yerrabati, S. (2018). A systematic review of research on professional doctorates. London Review of Education, 16(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.16.1.03

Kot, F. C., & Hendel, D. D. (2012). Emergence and growth of professional doctorates in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada and Australia: A comparative analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 37(3), 345-364. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.516356

Leist, J., & Scott, J. (2011). Differentiation ... but to what degree? The Ed.D. and Ph.D. in higher education programs. Academic Leadership (15337812), 9(3), 1-15.

Lester, S. (2004). Conceptualizing the practitioner doctorate. Studies in Higher Education, 29(6), 757-770. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307507042000287249

Perry, J. A. (2016). The EdD and the scholarly practitioner: The CPED path. Information Age Publishing, Inc.

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.

Shulman, L. S., Golde, C. M., Bueschel, A. C., & Garabedian, K. J. (2006). Reclaiming Education’s Doctorates: A Critique and a Proposal. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 25-32. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035003025

Storey, V. A., & Hesbol, K. A. (2014). Can the dissertation in practice bridge the researcher-practitioner gap? The Education Professional Practice Doctorate and the impact of the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate Consortium. Journal of School Public Relations, 35(3), 324-347. https://doi.org/10.3138/jspr.35.3.324

Taysum, A. (2006). The distinctiveness of the EdD within the university tradition. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 38(3), 323-334. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620600984255

Boyce, B. A. (2012). Redefining the EdD: Seeking a separate identity. Quest, 64(1), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2012.653260

CPED (2021). Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED). https://www.cpedinitiative.org/cped-improvement-groups

Dill, D. D., & Morrison, J. L. (1985). EdD and PhD research training in the field of higher education: A survey and a proposal. The Review of Higher Education, 8(2), 169–186. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.1985.0027

Hawkes, D., & Yerrabati, S. (2018). A systematic review of research on professional doctorates. London Review of Education, 16(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.16.1.03

Kot, F. C., & Hendel, D. D. (2012). Emergence and growth of professional doctorates in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada and Australia: A comparative analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 37(3), 345–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.516356

Leist, J., & Scott, J. (2011). Differentiation ... but to what degree? The Ed.D. and Ph.D. in higher education programs. Academic Leadership (15337812), 9(3), 1–15.

Lester, S. (2004). Conceptualizing the practitioner doctorate. Studies in Higher Education, 29(6), 757–770. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307507042000287249

Perry, J. A. (2016). The EdD and the scholarly practitioner: The CPED path. Information Age Publishing, Inc.

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.

Shulman, L. S., Golde, C. M., Bueschel, A. C., & Garabedian, K. J. (2006). Reclaiming Education’s Doctorates: A Critique and a Proposal. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035003025

Storey, V. A., & Hesbol, K. A. (2014). Can the dissertation in practice bridge the researcher-practitioner gap? The Education Professional Practice Doctorate and the impact of the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate Consortium. Journal of School Public Relations, 35(3), 324–347. https://doi.org/10.3138/jspr.35.3.324

Taysum, A. (2006). The distinctiveness of the EdD within the university tradition. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 38(3), 323–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620600984255

Downloads

Published

2022-01-19

How to Cite

Tamim, S., & Torres, K. M. (2022). Evolution of the Dissertation in Practice. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 7(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2022.267

Issue

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

Section

Themed - DiP

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. 

Most read articles by the same author(s)