Preparing Scholarly Practitioners to Use Improvement Science

A Systematic, Iterative, and Reflective Approach to Teaching Applied Quantitative Research Methods




doctor of education, improvement science, research methods, quantitative methods


While doctoral leadership programs have widely adopted Improvement Science (IS) as a signature pedagogy, few studies have examined how to best equip doctoral students with the knowledge and research skills they need to utilize IS in practice. More specifically, research is needed to determine the most effective and meaningful pedagogy for preparing doctoral students to understand, analyze, and apply statistical theory and quantitative research designs in coursework and as part of the IS Dissertation in Practice (DiP). This essay focuses on the systematic, iterative, and reflective approach of one faculty member to develop and refine a Doctor of Education program’s primary applied quantitative methods course to help students across three cohorts develop the theoretical and practical knowledge and skills they need to lead change.

Author Biography

Noelle A. Paufler, Clemson University



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

Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED). (2022). The CPED framework.

Ferguson, S. L., Hovey, K. A., & Henson, R. K. (2017). Quantitative preparation in doctoral education programs: A mixed-methods study of doctoral student perspectives on their quantitative training. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12, 137-–56.

Firestone, W. A., Perry, J. A., Leland, A. S., & McKeon, R. T. (2019). Teaching research and data use in the education doctorate. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 16(1), 81–102.

Gummer, E. S., & Mandinach, E. B. (2015). Building a conceptual framework for data literacy. Teachers College Record, 117(4), 1–22.

Hinnant-Crawford, B. N. (2020). Improvement science in education: A primer. Myers Education Press.

Kerrigan, M. R., & Hayes, K. M. (2016). EdD students’ self-efficacy and interest in conducting research. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 11, 14–162.

Leech, N. L., & Haug, C. A. (2015). Investigating graduate level research and statistics courses in schools of education. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10, 93–110.

Pan, W., & Tang, M. (2004). Examining the effectiveness of innovative instructional methods on reducing statistics anxiety for graduate students in the social sciences. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31(2), 149–159.

Perry, J. A. (2016). The scholarly practitioner as steward of practice. In V. A. Storey & K. A. Hesbol (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to dissertation development and research methods (pp. 300-313). IGI Global.

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.

Pogrow, S. (2018). Authentic quantitative analysis for education leadership decision-making and EdD dissertations: A practical, intuitive, and intelligible approach (2nd ed.). ICPEL Publications.

Wilson, V. A., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2001). Increasing and decreasing anxiety: A study of doctoral students in education research courses [Paper presentation]. Mid-South Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Little Rock, AR, United States.




How to Cite

Paufler, N. A. (2023). Preparing Scholarly Practitioners to Use Improvement Science: A Systematic, Iterative, and Reflective Approach to Teaching Applied Quantitative Research Methods. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 8(2), 10–15.



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