Holding Up the Mirror

CPED Rubric Self-Study as Deliberate Improvement Work

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2026.627

Keywords:

reflection, self-study, program improvement, cultural shift

Abstract

Engaging in self-study enables organizations to evaluate their current performance, strengths, and weaknesses. This essay discusses how we, as faculty members in the Education Doctorate (EdD) program at Marymount University, collected and analyzed data for two iterations of the CPED Principles Implementation & Framework© Impact Self-Study Project as part of deliberate program improvement. Specifically, we examine how we used the CPED Guiding Principles Implementation Rubric and CPED Framework Impact Rubric to reflectively identify gaps in our instructional practices and processes, how we acted on those findings, and the evidence of cultural shift that resulted. Central to this culture is the intentional integration of feedback from multiple stakeholders, including faculty, students, alumni, dissertation mentors, and program leadership. This collaborative spirit of growth continues to inspire us as we push forward, always looking inward and striving to learn and evolve. We hope that our experience will resonate with others as a starting point for their own reflection and engagement in self-study.

References

Azevedo, P. C., Hauth, C., Macedonia, A., Marotta, J., Thompson, J. (2023, October 4-6). Retreating: The gift of time and community to write [Paper session]. Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) Convening, Pensacola, FL. Black, R. (2017). E-mentoring the online doctoral student from the dissertation prospectus through dissertation completion. Journal of Learning in Higher Education, 13(1), 1–8. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1139683.pdf

Carino, P. (1995). Early writing centers: Toward a history. The Writing Center Journal, 15(2), 103–115. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43441973

Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate. (2010). CPED Design Concepts. CPED.

Crystle, J., Melideo, S., Boyd, R., & Hauth, C. (2024). Faculty mentors’ perceptions: Evidence of applied practitioner research by EdD candidates. Impacting Education: Journal for Transforming Professional Practice, 9(2), 1–8.

Crystle, J., Hauth, C., Boyd, R., & Marotta, J. (2025, October 22-24). From brainstorming to dreamstorming: Honoring the voices of our mentees through Socratic mentorship practices [Conference session]. Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) Convening, Philadelphia, PA.

Flora, J. D. (2017). The doctoral mentoring relationship: The phenomenology of scholarly leadership. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12, 219–249. https://doi.org/10.28945/3882

Garvey, B. (2023). Mentoring origins and evolution. In D. D. Law & N. Domínguez (Eds.), Making connections: A handbook for effective formal mentoring programs in academia. Utah State University. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/makingconnections/3/

Hauth, C., Crystle, J., Melideo, S. Boyd, R., & Thompson, J. (2024). Humanizing the online doctoral experience with high-impact faculty engagement and mentorship. In L.E. Gray & S. Dunn (Eds.), Humanizing online teaching and learning in higher education. IGI Global.

Jairam, D. & Kahl, D. H., Jr., (2012). Navigating the doctoral experience: The role of social support in successful degree completion. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 311–329. https://doi.org/10.28945/1700

Knowles, M. S. (1950). Informal adult education. Association Press.

Nygaard, C. (2023). Enhancing student learning outcomes through contextualised learning activities. In K. Enomoto & R. Warner (Eds.), Enhancing student learning outcomes in higher education (pp. 117146). Libri Publishing Limited.

Oetjen, R. M., Oetjen, D., Richardson, E., Calkins, C., & Gordon, J. (2023). Creating a culture of connectedness to foster alumni engagement. Journal of Health Administration Education, 40(1), 23–38.

Rigler Jr, K. L., Bowlin, L. K., Sweat, K., Watts, S., & Throne, R. (2017). Agency, socialization, and support: A critical review of doctoral student attrition [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Doctoral Education, University of Central Florida. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED580853.pdf

Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. Basic Books.

Silvia, P. J. (2019). How to write a lot: A practical guide to productive academic writing. American Psychological Association.

Starke-Meyerring, D. (2011). The paradox of writing in doctoral education: Student experiences. In L. McAlpine & C. Amundsen (Eds.), Doctoral education: Research-based strategies for doctoral students, supervisors and administrators (pp. 75-95). Springer

Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms (3rd ed.). ASCD.

Torrance, M., Thomas, G.V. and Robinson, E.J. (1999). Individual differences in the writing behaviour of undergraduate students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69: 189–199. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709999157662

Downloads

Published

2026-09-22

How to Cite

Boyd, R., Marotta, J., Hauth, C., Crystle, J., R. Azevedo, P. C., Melideo, S., … Zimmerman, T. (2026). Holding Up the Mirror: CPED Rubric Self-Study as Deliberate Improvement Work . Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 11(4), 18–24. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2026.627

Issue

Vol. 11 No. 4 (2026): Themed-CPED Programs Self-Study

Section

Themed-CPED Programs Self-Study

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Ruth Boyd, Jessica Marotta, Clara Hauth, Jennifer Crystle, Paula Cristina R. Azevedo, Shannon Melideo, Jennifer Scully, Christine Valadez, Travis Zimmerman

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.