Reflections on the CPED Self-Study Process
Strengthening Practice and Purpose
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2026.638Keywords:
CPED, self-study, EdD Assessment, University of MissouriAbstract
This reflective essay examines the challenges, learning gains, and programmatic changes that emerged from the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) Principles Implementation & Framework© Impact Self-Study Project conducted by a newly appointed coordinator and Graduate Assistant in the Education Doctorate (EdD) program at the University of Missouri. The self-study served as a catalyst for examining alignment with the CPED Framework©. Findings indicate that although the program’s philosophy, structure, and pedagogy were largely aligned with the Framework©, CPED was not explicitly named in program materials, resulting in limited stakeholder awareness. Notably, students still identified skill development consistent with the CPED Guiding Principles Implementation Rubric. The timing of the study alongside accreditation with the Higher Learning Commission created both opportunities and challenges, particularly within a fully online program where stakeholders rarely meet face-to-face. In response, the program revised recruitment practices to explicitly introduce CPED to prospective students and began embedding CPED language and design concepts more intentionally throughout the curriculum and advising structures. The reflection highlights the value of intentional framework integration and offers lessons for other EdD programs engaging in self-study.
References
Butler, B. M., Gregory, K. H., Diacopoulos, M. M., & Branyon, A. P. (2026). How do we define self-study and decide what to study? In Beginning self-study research (Vol. 29, pp. 37-54). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-12944-4_3
Chow, J., Tse, A., & Armatas, C. (2020). Assessing the university student perceived learning gains in generic skills: A longitudinal study using Rasch modelling. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 12(5), 993–1008. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-05-2019-0130
Clark, A. M., Zhan, M., Dellinger, J. T., & Semingson, P. L. (2023). Innovating teaching practice through professional learning communities: Determining knowledge sharing and program value. Sage Open, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231200983
Dinu, L., Auter, P., & Arceneaux, P. (2015). Gathering, analyzing, and implementing student feedback to online courses: Is the quality matters rubric the answer? Istanbul Journal of Open and Distance Education, 1, 15–28.
Dorontich, R., Robinson, M. E., & Tompson-Wolfe, K. (2025, Fall). Creating multi-level stakeholder buy-in for new curriculum. NOSS Practitioner to Practitioner. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1486609.pdf
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2006). Educational research: An introduction (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
de Rodriguez, V. D. (2007). The senior year experience at Texas A&M University: Graduating seniors make meaning of their undergraduate education (Publication No. 74185616) [Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University]. http://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/ETD-TAMU-2483
Jones, N. N. (2018). Human centered syllabus design: Positioning our students as expert end-users. Computers and Composition, 49, 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2018.05.002
Kezar, A., Hallett, R. E., Corwin, Z. B., & Hypolite, L. (2025). Moving toward institutional culture change in higher education: An exploration into cross-functional professional learning communities. Innovative Higher Education, 50, 687–714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09753-1
Mertens, D. M., Hall, J. N., & Wilson, A. T. (2025). Program evaluation theory and practice: A comprehensive guide. Guilford Press.
Moye, J. (2017). Are we doing a good job? In praise of program evaluation. Clinical Gerontologist, 40(2), 75–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/07317115.2016.1268864
Perry, J. A., Zambo, D., & Abruzzo, E. (2020). Faculty leaders’ challenges and strategies in redesigning EdD programs. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 5(1).
Samaras, A. P., Hjalmarson, M., Bland, L. C., Nelson, J. K., & Christopher, E. K. (2019). Self-study as a method for engaging STEM faculty in transformative change to improve teaching. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 31(2), 195–213.
Schmidt, C. M., Sarvary, M. A., St. Juliana, J. R., & Specht, C. D. (2026). From implicit to explicit: Overcoming common barriers to teaching critical thinking through an innovative online module. Frontiers in Education, 11, Article 1689765. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2026.1689765
Schneider, S. C., & Niederjohn, R. J. (1995). Assessing student learning outcomes using graduating senior exit surveys and alumni surveys. In Proceedings Frontiers in Education 1995: 25th Annual Conference. Engineering Education for the 21st Century (Vol. 1). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.1995.483060
Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2005), Introduction to rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time, convey effective feedback, and promote student learning. Stylus Publications.
Wagner, J. L., Smith, K. J., Johnson, C., Hilaire, M. L., & Medina, M. S. (2023). Best practices in syllabus design. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 87(3), ajpe8995. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8995
Wills-Jackson, C. (2025). A self-study using data to inform student-teacher supports in a transformed teacher preparation program. School-University Partnerships, 18(1), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1108/sup-08-2024-0016
Woods, J. C. (2021). Self-study: A method for continuous professional learning and a methodology for knowledge transfer. Quality Advancement in Nursing Education – Avancées en formation infirmière, 7(2), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.17483/2368-6669.1278
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Lisa Scheese, Sabina Aghayeva
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- 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.
- Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
- 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:
- Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- The Author represents and warrants that:
- the Work is the Author’s original work;
- the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
- the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
- the Work has not previously been published;
- the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
- the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
- 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.
