A Three-Chapter DiP

Focusing on Scholar-Practitioner Preparation

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2025.496

Keywords:

dissertation, EdD, scholar-practitioner

Abstract

Led by CPED’s reconceptualization of the Education Doctorate, EdD programs nationally continue to explore ways to re-envision the Dissertation-in-Practice (DiP) specifically for the development of Scholar-Practitioners. Even as work on innovative dissertation formats has accelerated, many, if not most, DiPs still resemble traditional five-chapter academic dissertations. This article explores an alternative three-chapter DiP format with a balanced focus on (1) an action research study conducted by the candidate, and (2) the candidate’s application of findings, alongside social and organizational theory, in their leadership practice. In this way, the three-chapter DiP balances a focus on research and leadership practice, amenable to review, critique, and use by practitioners as well as academics. In this essay, faculty and recent-graduate coauthors describe their first-hand perspectives navigating this model as students and faculty, and add to the emerging landscape of practice regarding EdD dissertations. We outline the rationale, purpose, and assessment guidelines defining this format, and describe key challenges we encountered. Moreover, we discuss the model's flexibility in application, highlighting examples and approaches used by students. The discussion will be useful for EdD programs, faculty, and students who are interested in exploring innovative DiP models that are grounded in both research and practice. 

References

Anderson, T., Saunders, G., & Alexander, I. (2022). Alternative dissertation formats in education-based doctorates. Higher Education Research and Development, 41(3), 593–612. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1867513

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

Beam, F. C. (2023). The importance of place andits impact on belonging for the Black college student [Doctoral dissertation, University of Dayton]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center.https://etd.ohiolink.edu/acprod/odb_etd/ws/send_file/send?accession=dayton169890961461496&disposition=inline

Bell-Ellison, B.A., & Dedrick, R.F. (2008). What do doctoral students value in their ideal mentor? Research in Higher Education, 49(6), 555–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9085-8

Broome, M. E. (2018). The manuscript option dissertation: Dissemination and challenges. Nurse Author & Editor, 28(1).

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. The Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate.

Cahusac de Caux, B. (2019). A short history of doctoral studies. In L. Pretorius, L. Macaulay, & B. Cahusac de Caux (Eds.), Wellbeing in doctoral education (pp. 9–17). Springer Nature Singapore.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9302-0_2

Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED). (2024). The CPED Framework. https://www.cpedinitiative.org/the-Framework

Donohoo, J., Hattie, J., & Eells, R. (2018). The power of collective efficacy. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development, 75(6), 40–45.

Fine, M., & Torre, M. E. (2021). Critical participatory action research: Conceptual foundations. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000241-001

In M. Fine & M. E. Torre, Essentials of critical participatory action research (3–19). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000241-001

Graves, J. M., Postma, J., Katz, J. R., Kehoe, L., Swalling, E., & Barbosa-Leiker, C. (2018). A national survey examining manuscript dissertation formats among nursing PhD programs in the United States. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 50(3), 314–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12374

Hakkarainen, K., Hytönen, K., Makkonen, J., & Lehtinen, E. (2016). Extending collective practices of doctoral education from natural to educational sciences. Studies in Higher Education, 41(1), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.914910

Hattie, J. (2015). What works best in education: The politics of collaborative expertise. Pearson.

Hunter, M. A., Pattilo, M., Robinson Z., & Keeanga-Yamattha, T. (2016). Black placemaking: celebration, play, and poetry. Theory, Culture & Society, 33(7-8), 33–56. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0263276416635259

Jackson, D. J. (2023). Literacy: Black men ages 16-24 are still behind [Doctoral dissertation, University of Dayton]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=dayton1700905606809078

Jenkins, N. (2023). Transgender student sense of belonging in the classroom: Incorporating teacher input for policy creation [Doctoral dissertation, University of Dayton]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=dayton1702292438436386

Karikari, L.D.A. (2023). Your voice is my favorite sound: Lived experiences of RoyalSapphires members and teachers at Regal Academy [Doctoral dissertation, University of Dayton]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/acprod/odb_etd/ws/send_file/send?accession=dayton1689003384056172&disposition=inline

Kennedy, B. L., Bondy, E., Dana, N. F., Vescio, V., & Ma, V. W. (2020). The development and enactment of practitioner scholarship among graduates from one online Ed.D. programme. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44(5), 653–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2019.1576858

Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. (30th Anniversary Edition). Russell Sage Foundation.

Loss, C. P., & Ryan, C. J. (2016). The dissertation dilemma and the challenge of American graduate education. Good Society, 25(2-3), 313–331.https://doi.org/10.5325/goodsociety.25.2-3.0313

Lowrey, K., Conrad, K.A., & Beier, S. (2015). COACH the journey: Committee chair reflections on guiding doctoral students. The Academic Forum, 4(1), 8–21.

MacGregor, C. J., & Fellabaum, J. (2016). Dissertation redesign for scholarly practitioners in educational leadership: Increasing impact through dissemination-ready sections. In V. A. Storey & K. A. Hesbol (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to dissertation development and research methods. Information Science Reference.

O’Meara, K.A., Culpepper, D., Misra, J., & Jaeger, A. (2020). Equity-minded faculty workloads: Worksheet booklet. National Science Foundation.

Perry, J. A. (2016). The scholarly practitioner as steward of the practice. In V. A. Storey & K. A. Hesbol (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to dissertation development and research methods (pp. 300-315). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0445-0

Perry, J. A. (2023). Reclaiming the education doctorate: A guidebook for (re)designing EdD programs. Myers Education Press.

Preville, P. (2023). The professor’s guide to using Bloom’s taxonomy. Top Hat Publishers.

Santos, R.J. (2023). Examining the impact of Indiana's restriction on resident tuition rates for undocumented immigrants [Doctoral dissertation, University of Dayton]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/acprod/odb_etd/ws/send_file/send?accession=dayton1690369206623193&disposition=inline

Shirazi, R. (2018). The doctoral dissertation and scholarly communication: Adapting to changing publication practices among graduate students. College & Research Library News, January, 34–37.

Singh, K. K. (2023). Exploring equity, diversity and inclusion in social services: A casestudy [Doctoral dissertation, University of Dayton]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=dayton1701508570238578

Smaldone, A., Heitkemper, E., Jackman, K., Joanne Woo, K., & Kelson, J. (2019). Dissemination of PhD dissertation research by dissertation format: A retrospective cohort study. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 51(5), 599–607. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12504

Storey, V. A., & Hesbol, K.A. (Eds.). (2014). Contemporary approaches to dissertation development and research methods. Information Science Reference.

Storey, V.A., & Maughan, B.D. (2014). Beyond a definition: Designing and specifying Dissertation in Practice (DiP) models. The Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate.

Storey, V. A., Caskey, M. M., Hesbol, K. A., Marshall, J. E., Maughan, B., & Dolan, A. W. (2015). Examining EdD dissertations in practice: The Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate. International HETL Review, 5(Article 2).

Swank, J. M., Weaver, J. L., & DePue, K. (2021). Manuscript-style dissertations: An alternative to the traditional dissertation style. Journal of Counselor Preparation and Supervision, 14(4). https://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/jcps/vol14/iss4/14

Thomas, R. A., West, R. E., & Rich, P. (2016). Benefits, challenges, and perceptions of the multiple article dissertation format in instructional technology. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 32(2), 82–98. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2573

Tichavakunda, A. A. (2024). Studying Black student life on campus: Toward a theory of Black placemaking in higher education. Urban Education, 59(1), 96–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085920971354

Tindall, M. B. (2023). A pilot study on the effects of increased lab experiments and hands-on activities on summative assessments [Doctoral dissertation, University of Dayton]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=dayton1700047398249361

Watson, D. I., & Nehls, K. (2016). Alternative dissertation formats: Preparing scholars for the academy and beyond. In V. A. Storey & K. A. Hesbol (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to dissertation development and research methods (pp. 43-52). Information Science Reference.

Wells, J.B. (2023). Council for the advancement of standards (11). Washington, DC. Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education.

Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. In Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006

Zambo, D. (2011). Action research as signature pedagogy in an Education Doctorate program: The reality and hope. Innovative Higher Education, 36(4), https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-010-9171-7

Downloads

Published

2025-08-04

How to Cite

Ziskin, M. B., Garcia, R. A., Essex, E., Beam, F. C., & Santos, R. (2025). A Three-Chapter DiP: Focusing on Scholar-Practitioner Preparation. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 10(3), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2025.496

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 3 (2025): The Present and Future of EdD Alternative Dissertations

Section

Themed-The Present and Future of EdD Alternative Dissertations

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Mary B. Ziskin, Ricardo Arévalo Garcia, Elizabeth Essex, Faithe C. Beam, Rachel Santos

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.