Inquiry as Practice

The Pathway to Redesigning an Educational Leadership Doctoral Research Seminar Series

Authors

  • Steven Tolman Georgia Southern University
  • Daniel W. Calhoun Georgia Southern University
  • Juliann Sergi McBrayer Georgia Southern University
  • Nikheal Patel Georgia Southern University
  • Elise J. Cain Georgia Southern University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2023.329

Keywords:

EdD, research seminar, CPED, backward design, dissertation, A.B.D., inquiry as practice, educational leadership

Abstract

As faculty of an educational leadership doctoral program (EdD) aligned with the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) principles, we acknowledge the importance of inquiry to develop scholarly practitioners. Applying the tenet of Inquiry as Practice, our EdD faculty critically examined the doctoral curriculum to explore ways to effectively prepare our doctoral students to learn and apply research methodology meaningfully. This essay details how the review of our research curriculum led to a pedagogical and curriculum redesign of our research seminar series. This revised research seminar series culminates in a course offered every fall/spring semester in the final two years of the program and intentionally has different faculty members teaching each course. We have utilized a backward design to create the themes/content of these seminar courses to better prepare students for their dissertation research.

References

Ames, C., Berman, R., & Casteel, A. (2018). A preliminary examination of doctoral student retention factors in private online workspaces. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 79–107. https://doi.org/10.28945/3958

Arslan-Ari, I., Ari, F., & Grant, M.M. (2018). Action research experiences for scholarly practitioners in online education doctorate program: Design, reality, and lessons learned. TechTrends 62, 441–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0308-3

Berman, R., & Ames, C. (2015). Private online workspaces for doctoral learners – Enhanced communication and reduced isolation. Proceedings of Informing Science & IT Education Conference (InSITE), 2015, 101–112. https://doi.org/10.28945/2182

Breitenbach, E. (2019). Evaluating a model to increase doctorate program completion rates: Focusing on social connectedness and structure. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14, 217–236. https://doi.org/10.28945/4239

Buss, R. (2019). Graduates’ continuing work as scholarly practitioners after participation in a Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate guided, EdD program. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14, 803–817. https://doi.org/10.28945/4451

Caboni, T. C., & Proper, E. (2009). Re-envisioning the professional doctorate for educational leadership and higher education leadership: Vanderbilt University’s Peabody College Ed.D. program. Peabody Journal of Education, 84(1), 61–68.

Carnegie Project of the Education Doctorate (CPED) (n.d.). Vision and mission. https://cped.memberclicks.net/vision-mission

Coaxum, J., Farrow, M., & Manning, J. (2022). Education leadership programs responding to current American crises. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 7(3), 34–39. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2022.223

Foster, H.A., Chesnut, S., Thomas, J., & Robinson, A. (2023). Differentiating the EdD and the PhD in higher education: A survey of characteristics and trends. Impacting Education, 8(1), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2023.288

Friesen, S., & Jacobsen, M. (2021). Collaborative design of professional graduate programs in education. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 12(1), 64–76.

Gardner, S. K. (2009). The development of doctoral students: Phases of challenge and support. ASHE Higher Education Report, 34(6), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.3406

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

Golde, C. M. (2005). The role of the department and discipline in doctoral student attrition: Lessons from four departments. Journal of Higher Education, 76(6), 669–700. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2005.11772304

Goldring, E., & Schuermann, P. (2009). The changing context of k-12 education administration: Consequences for Ed.D. program design and delivery. Peabody Journal of Education, 84(1), 9–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619560802679583

Hall, L., & Burns, L. (2009). Identity development and mentoring in doctoral education. Harvard Educational Review, 79(1), 49–70.

Hochbein, C., & Perry, J. A. (2013). The role of research in the professional doctorate. Planning and Changing, 44(3/4), 181–194.

Hoffman, R.L., & Perry, J.A. (2016). The CPED framework: Tools for change. In J.A. Perry (Ed.), The Ed.D. and the scholarly practitioner (pp. 13-26). IAP.

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

Kelley, M., & Salisbury-Glennon, J. (2016). The role of self-regulation in doctoral students’ status of all but dissertation (abd). Innovative Higher Education, 41(1), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-015-9336-5

Kerrigan, M. R., & Hayes, K. W. (2016). EdD students’ self-efficacy and interest in conducting research. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, 147–162.

Kriner, B., Coffman, K., Adkisson, A., Putman, P., & Monaghan, C. (2015). From students to scholars: The transformative power of communities of practice. Adult Learning, 26(2), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159515573021

Lake, E., Koper, E., Balayan, A., & Lynch, L. (2018). Cohorts and connections: Doctoral retention at a mid-Atlantic comprehensive institution. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 20(2), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025116656386

Leach, L. F., Reyes, J. M., Baker, C., Glaman, R., Barkley, J. M., Beach, D. M., Higham, J. R., Rynearson, K., Weber, M., Farmer, T. A., Bowden, R., Brock, J., & Bunch, P. (2020). Approaching EdD program redesign as a problem of practice. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 5(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2020.100

Levine, A. (2005). Educating school leaders. Education Schools Project.

Locke, L. A., & Boyle, M. (2016). Avoiding the abd abyss: A grounded theory study of a dissertation-focused course for doctoral students in an educational leadership program. Qualitative Report, 21(9), 1574–1593.

Maranto, R., Ritter, G., & Levine, A. (2010). The future of ed. schools. Education Week, 29(16), 36–25.

McBrayer, J. S., Melton, T. D., Calhoun, D. W., Dunbar, M., & Tolman, S. (2018). The correlation between self-efficacy and time to degree completion of educational leadership doctoral students. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 413–439. https://doi.org/10.28945/4138

McConnell, K. (2015). Rethinking admissions: Recruiting for retention. NAGAP Perspectives, 27(2), 14–15.

Mullen, C. A. (2012). From student to professor: Translating a graduate degree into a career in academia. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Perry, J. (2012). To Ed.D. or not to Ed.D.? Kappan Magazine, 94(1), 41-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171209400108

Phillips, J. C., Geller, K. D., & Mawritz, K. J. (2018). Program innovation and design in an era of accountability: Ed.D. faculty work as a community of practice. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 3(2), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2018.64

Shepherd, K., Fowler, S., McCormick, J., Wilson, C., & Morgan, D. (2016). The search for role clarity: Challenges and implications for special education teacher preparation. Teacher Education & Special Education, 39(2), 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406416637904

Shulman, L. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1162/0011526054622015

Shulman, L., Golde, C., Bueschel, A., & Garabedian, K. (2006). Reclaiming education’s doctorates: A critique and a proposal. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035003025

Snyder, T. D., de Brey, C., & Dillow, S. A. (2019). Digest of education statistics 2017 (NCES 2018-070). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Spaulding, L. S., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2012). Hearing their voices: Factors doctoral candidates attribute to their persistence. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 199–219. https://doi.org/10.28945/1589

Stark, J. B. (2019). The value in pursuing the EdD. Journal of School Administration Research and Development, 4(1), 39–41. https://doi.org/10.32674/jsard.v4i1.1942

Stewart A.J. (2016). Exploring nonprofit executive turnover. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 27(1), 43–58.

Taylor, S., & Youngs, H. (2018). Leadership succession: Future proofing pipelines. Journal of Deaf Studies & Deaf Education, 23(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enx037

Thomas, J. R., Nelson, J. K., & Magill, R. A. (1986). A case for an alternative format for the thesis/dissertation. Quest, 38(2), 116–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.1986.10483846

Weiler, J. R., & Lomotey, K. (2022). Defining rigor in justice-oriented Ed.D. programs: Preparing leaders to disrupt and transform schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 58(1), 110–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X211050926

Zirkel, P. (2012). Doctoral programs in educational leadership: A duality framework of commonality and differences. Educational Considerations, 40(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.4148/0146-9282.1078

Downloads

Published

2023-04-24

How to Cite

Tolman, S., Calhoun, D. W., Sergi McBrayer, J., Patel, N., & Cain, E. J. (2023). Inquiry as Practice: The Pathway to Redesigning an Educational Leadership Doctoral Research Seminar Series. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 8(2), 40–46. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2023.329

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 2 (2023): Themed - Reimagining Research Methods Coursework for the Preparation of Scholar-Practitioners

Section

Themed-Reimagining Research Methods Coursework for the Preparation of Scholar-Practitioners

License

Copyright (c) 2023 Steven Tolman, Daniel W. Calhoun, Juliann Sergi McBrayer, Nikheal Patel, Elise J. Cain

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.