edd dissertation process

Guide to the Doctor of Education (EdD) Dissertation

The Doctor of Education (EdD) dissertation is considered a central component of EdD programs. The EdD dissertation is a five-chapter document that investigates an issue in education, reviews the existing literature on this issue, adds additional insight through a qualitative and/or quantitative research study, and proposes one or more solutions. It is considered the culmination of a student’s knowledge of education systems and his or her training in the academic research process. Most EdD programs require students to formally publish their dissertation and/or present their findings to a group of faculty and peers.

The dissertation and dissertation defense are two of the most challenging experiences students will have during their program, but are also two of the most engaging and rewarding from an intellectual perspective. The dissertation allows students to truly apply all the skills and knowledge they have gained during their graduate work to an education issue in which they are invested. Below is a more detailed description of EdD dissertations and the important steps students should take to successfully prepare for, complete, and defend their dissertation.

Doctorate of Education Dissertations

EdD dissertations are students’ opportunity to contribute original research on and insight into an issue in education, such as educational disparities, curriculum development or instruction challenges, school funding problems, college counseling and guidance, job skills development, or standardized testing. For their dissertation, students complete research under the guidance of a research mentor, and receive academic credit for this work. Students typically attend seminars and/or other classes that provide structure around the processes of developing a research question, formulating a research plan, reviewing existing academic literature, and writing about their findings. Many programs require students to present their findings to a committee and/or publish their dissertation in an academic journal.

The Structure of EdD Dissertations

As mentioned previously, dissertations are traditionally divided into five chapters: Introduction, Literature Review, Research Methodology, Results and Analysis, and Discussion and Conclusions. A brief description of each chapter section is below:

• Introduction : The introduction includes background information about the topic of study and its purpose, the significance of the student’s research, and existing literature on the subject. It also provides a summary of the results of one’s study, and their implications.
• Literature Review : This section explains the existing literature on the student’s topic of study, and places the student’s work in the context of existing theoretical frameworks that are relevant to one’s research.
• Research Methodology : This chapter focuses on how the student gathers qualitative and/or quantitative data regarding his or her research query.
• Results and Analysis : This section explains in detail the results of the student’s study, and analyzes it to arrive at actionable conclusions.
• Discussion and Conclusions : This chapter places the student’s findings in the context of the educational system(s) of focus (e.g. private or public education, secondary or post-secondary) to illustrate how the student’s research contributes to the larger understanding of the educational issue at hand. This section also makes recommendations for the application of the student’s findings to real-world education practice as well as further research on the subject.

Dissertations are typically very long, in-depth works. Many dissertations are between 100 and 200 pages in length or longer, and seek to comprehensively investigate a specific issue or problem in education. Due to the intensive nature of dissertation research and writing, students must plan their research query and methodology well in advance, and seek the support of research mentors and other faculty throughout the process.

Overview of the EdD Dissertation Completion Process

In general, students begin thinking about their dissertation topic during the second year of their program. The second year is also when students begin taking courses in research and data analysis. The term prior to the beginning of their independent research, students typically take a dissertation seminar, during which they discuss potential research topics to explore and learn more about the academic research process. During their third year, students delve into independent research, while still receiving guidance from their selected faculty research mentor. Students generally submit several drafts to a dissertation committee for review and revision suggestions before they finalize their paper. Upon the completion of their dissertation, students may be required to publish their writing and/or present on their research.

Below is a general timeline of the dissertation completion process, followed by a description of the eight steps to successfully completing an EdD dissertation. The timeline below should be used for example purposes only, as programs vary in terms of when they have students complete their requisite research courses.

The Steps to Completing an EdD Dissertation

Choose a research topic and review the existing literature.

During their classes, students should take note of the topics within education that interest them and the issues that they have encountered during their work in education that they would like to see resolved. These areas are often rich with potential research questions. Conducting research within these areas of interest by reading academic articles is an important step in finding a potential question or issue in education that merits further investigation. It is important that students select a research question that is specific enough to allow for in-depth research, is not overwhelming, and is engaging enough to students to carry them through over a year of independent research.

After identifying their field of focus and preliminary research query, students must gain a thorough understanding of the existing literature concerning their field, as well as the theoretical frameworks and conceptual models that have shaped current research methodologies. In general, students should start with articles that have been published within the last 3-5 years, and then review less recent studies that are considered flagship works that have shaped the field in important ways. While reading through this research, students should stay organized with their notes, the conclusions they draw from their literature review, and how these conclusions impact their research study, as they will have to write about these topics in their dissertation.

Select a Research Advisor and Committee

One of the most important parts of students’ research process is selecting a dissertation advisor and committee. Students’ dissertation advisors are faculty members within the school’s EdD program who work closely with students to ensure that they select a research question and project that are manageable in scope, meet certain research and writing deadlines, and have the support and mentorship they need to succeed.

The dissertation committee is comprised of a group of faculty members and instructors who are qualified to read through and provide feedback on a student’s dissertation. The chair of the committee is a student’s dissertation advisor, and the student selects other members based off of their work and expertise in their area of research. Many schools have guidelines around the individuals students can select to be a part of their committee. For example, an EdD program may require students to select one more faculty member from within the EdD program (in addition to their faculty advisor), one individual outside of the department who works in a related field, and one subject matter expert from inside or outside the department who can give in-depth advice regarding the student’s research project. Students must obtain approval from their program for their committee member selections.

A student’s dissertation committee not only provides feedback and support on a student’s research, but also serves as a collective evaluator of a student’s research progress and final product. For example, the committee generally sets dissertation chapter completion and submission deadlines to keep students on track, and also listens to and evaluates students’ dissertation defense, which is a requirement for graduation.

Create and Defend Research Proposal

After students receive approval of their dissertation committee, they work individually and with their dissertation chair/advisor to develop a formal research proposal. The proposal typically includes the first three chapters of a student’s dissertation: the Introduction, the Literature Review chapter, and the Research Methodology chapter. In this proposal, students must outline their specific research query and its relevance to and impact on different spheres of education. They must also explain the work that has already been done in their area of research, their methodologies for the study they will conduct, and their tools and plans for analysis.

Once students have written these three chapters and formalized their research proposal, they must meet with their committee to present and defend their research proposal. This defense is meant to identify any issues with a student’s research objective, review of the literature, or study methodology, so that the student can address these issues prior to conducting their research.

Develop a Timeline for Research and Writing

Students work with their dissertation committee to establish timelines for the completion of certain chapters and milestones in their study (e.g. the conducting of surveys or the compilation and analysis of data or records). A reasonable timeline may have students writing the first three chapters during the fall term of their third year, and the fourth and fifth chapters during the spring term of the same year. However, dissertation timelines will vary depending on whether students are pursuing their degree full-time or part-time, how early in their program they are able to take the requisite research courses prior to starting their independent work, how soon they are able to identify a research question, and other factors.

Apply for Institutional Review Board (IRB) Approval

The Institutional Review Board protects the rights and well-being of human subjects of research studies by working to ensure their consent to certain research procedures, and assuring their ethical treatment during the research process. All EdD research projects must receive IRB approval before proceeding. The IRB approval application is generally comprised of any study subject consent forms; copies of any surveys, questionnaires, or other data collection methods and tools to be used; a completed application form; and proof of IRB Training completion. IRB Training is typically completed through an online course module that is delivered through the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) program.

Conduct Study and Analyze Results

Once students have received IRB approval, they are ready to proceed with their planned study. Data collection methods vary depending on the nature and scope of one’s research project, but may include sending out surveys, conducting interviews, conducting student or teacher assessments, compiling student performance metrics from public records, and other methods of collecting relevant data to try and answer their research query. Once students have gathered sufficient data, they move to the analysis of this data to try and find trends or patterns that help answer their research question. Throughout this process, students consult with their advisor and with members of their dissertation committee as necessary.

Complete Dissertation and Submit for Review and Revision

Once students have completed their analysis, they must write the Results and Analysis and Discussion and Conclusions sections of their dissertation. The Results and Analysis chapter is a straightforward explanation of one’s study results and the conclusions that can be drawn from them. The Discussion and Conclusions section places the study results in the context of the larger educational issue(s) affected by one’s research, makes recommendations for the application of one’s findings, and also provides suggestions for further research in the area of study. Upon the completion of a full dissertation manuscript, students submit their work to their committee for review and commentary. Students may go through several revisions and then final edits of their dissertation prior to their final defense and formal manuscript submission.

Conduct Dissertation Final Defense

A milestone in the EdD student’s graduate school career is the dissertation final defense, which is a formal presentation that students make to their dissertation committee, in which they explain their research objectives, methodology, and findings. During and after their presentation, committee members ask questions in an effort to identify any weaknesses, inconsistencies, or other issues in the student’s research. When faced with these questions, students must answer clearly and defend the validity of their research methods, results, and conclusions. After the presentation and questions are over, the committee confers to decide whether the student has passed his or her final defense and will receive the doctoral degree.

Before completing their dissertation defense, it is recommended that students prepare well in advance by attending the defenses of other students within the same program and discussing their dissertation manuscript with their advisor and asking any questions regarding what to expect during the defense. Students should craft a strong and well-organized presentation, and also anticipate questions that their committee members may ask them.

Submit Dissertation for Formal Review

The final step students need to take to complete their dissertation is to submit their fully edited manuscript for formal review by their dissertation committee, after making any necessary modifications in response to recommendations given during their dissertation defense. Some programs require students to publish their dissertation in an academic journal, which requires students to format their manuscript according to journal guidelines.

EdDPrograms.org

What is an Ed.D. Dissertation? Complete Guide & Support Resources

Wondering how to tackle the biggest doctoral challenge of all? Use our guide to the Ed.D. dissertation to get started! Learn about the purpose of a Doctor of Education dissertation and typical topics for education students. Read through step-by-step descriptions of the dissertation process and the 5-chapter format. Get answers to Ed.D. dissertation FAQs . Or skip to the chase and find real-world examples of Doctor of Education dissertations and websites & resources for Ed.D. dissertation research.

What is an Ed.D. Dissertation?

Definition of an ed.d. dissertation.

An Ed.D. dissertation is a 5-chapter scholarly document that brings together years of original research to address a problem of practice in education. To complete a dissertation, you will need to go through a number of scholarly steps , including a final defense to justify your findings.

Purpose of an Ed.D. Dissertation

In a Doctor of Education dissertation, you will be challenged to apply high-level research & creative problem-solving to real-world educational challenges. You may be asked to:

• Take a critical look at current educational & administrative practices
• Address urgent issues in the modern education system
• Propose original & practical solutions for improvements
• Expand the knowledge base for educational practitioners

Topics of Ed.D. Dissertations

An Ed.D. dissertation is “customizable.” You’re allowed to chose a topic that relates to your choice of specialty (e.g. elementary education), field of interest (e.g. curriculum development), and environment (e.g. urban schools).

Think about current problems of practice that need to be addressed in your field. You’ll notice that Ed.D. dissertation topics often address one of the following:

• Academic performance
• Teaching methods
• Access to resources
• Social challenges
• Legislative impacts
• System effectiveness

Wondering how others have done it? Browse through Examples of Ed.D. Dissertations and read the titles & abstracts. You’ll see how current educators are addressing their own problems of practice.

Ed.D. Dissertation Process

1. propose a dissertation topic.

Near the beginning of a Doctor of Education program, you’ll be expected to identify a dissertation topic that will require substantial research. This topic should revolve around a unique issue in education.

Universities will often ask you to provide an idea for your topic when you’re applying to the doctoral program. You don’t necessarily need to stick to this idea, but you should be prepared to explain why it interests you. If you need inspiration, see our section on Examples of Ed.D. Dissertations .

You’ll be expected to solidify your dissertation topic in the first few semesters. Talking to faculty and fellow Ed.D. students can help in this process. Better yet, your educational peers will often be able to provide unique perspectives on the topic (e.g. cultural differences in teaching methods).

2. Meet Your Dissertation Chair & Committee

You won’t be going through the Ed.D. dissertation process alone! Universities will help you to select a number of experienced mentors. These include:

• Dissertation Chair/Faculty Advisor: The Chair of the Dissertation Committee acts as your primary advisor. You’ll often see them referred to as the Supervising Professor, Faculty Advisor, or the like. You’ll rely on this “Obi Wan” for their knowledge of the field, research advice & guidance, editorial input on drafts, and more. They can also assist with shaping & refining your dissertation topic.
• Dissertation Committee:  The Dissertation Committee is made up of ~3 faculty members, instructors and/or adjuncts with advanced expertise in your field of study. The Committee will offer advice, provide feedback on your research progress, and review your work & progress reports. When you defend your proposal and give your final defense , you’ll be addressing the Dissertation Committee.

3. Study for Ed.D. Courses

Doctor of Education coursework is designed to help you: a) learn how to conduct original research; and b) give you a broader perspective on your field of interest. If you take a look at the curriculum in any Ed.D. program, you’ll see that students have to complete credits in:

• Practical Research Methods (e.g. Quantitative Design & Analysis for Educational Leaders)
• Real-World Educational Issues (e.g. Educational Policy, Law & Practice)

When you’re evaluating possible Ed.D. programs, pay attention to the coursework in real-world educational issues. You’ll want to pick an education doctorate with courses that complement your dissertation topic.

4. Complete a Literature Review

A literature review is an evaluation of existing materials & research work that relate to your dissertation topic. It’s a written synthesis that:

• Grounds your project within the field
• Explains how your work relates to previous research & theoretical frameworks
• Helps to identify gaps in the existing research

Have a look at Literature Review Guides if you’d like to know more about the process. Our section on Resources for Ed.D. Dissertation Research also has useful links to journals & databases.

5. Craft a Dissertation Proposal

During the first two years of your Doctor of Education, you’ll use the knowledge you’ve learned from your coursework & discussions to write the opening chapters of your dissertation, including an:

• Introduction  that defines your chosen topic
• Literature Review of existing research in the field
• Proposed Research Methodology for finding the answer to your problem

When you’re putting together these elements, think about the practicals. Is the topic too big to address in one dissertation? How much time will your research take and how will you conduct it? Will your dissertation be relevant to your current job? If in doubt, ask your faculty advisor.

6. Defend Your Dissertation Proposal

About midway through the Ed.D. program, you will need to present your proposal to your Dissertation Committee. They will review your work and offer feedback. For example, the Committee will want to see that:

• Your research topic is significant.
• Your research methodology & timeline make sense.
• Relevant works are included in the literature review.

After the Committee approves your proposal, you can get stuck into conducting original research and writing up your findings. These two important tasks will take up the final years of your doctorate.

7. Conduct Original Research into Your Topic

As a Doctor of Education student, you will be expected to conduct your own research. Ed.D. students often use a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods (quantitative/qualitative) approach in this process.

• Quantitative Research: Collection & analysis of numerical data to identify characteristics, discover correlations, and/or test hypotheses.
• Qualitative Research: Collection & analysis of non-numerical data to understand & explain phenomena (e.g. questionnaires, in-depth interviews, focus groups, video artifacts, etc.).

Your Ed.D. coursework will ground you in research methods & tools, so you’ll be prepared to design your own project and seek IRB approval for any work involving human subjects.

Note: Occasionally, universities can get creative. For example, the Ed.D. program at San Jose State University asks students to produce a documentary film instead of conducting traditional research.

8. Write the Rest of Your Dissertation

Once you have written up the first few chapters of your dissertation (Intro, Literature Review & Proposed Methodology) and completed your research work, you’ll be able to complete the final chapters of your dissertation.

• Chapter 4 will detail your research findings.
• Chapter 5 is a conclusion that summarizes solutions to your problem of practice/topic.

This is where you and your faculty advisor will often have a lot of interaction! For example, you may need to rework the first few chapters of your dissertation after you’ve drafted the final chapters. Faculty advisors are extremely busy people, so be sure to budget in ample time for revisions and final edits.

9. Defend Your Dissertation

The final defense/candidacy exam is a formal presentation of your work to the Dissertation Committee. In many cases, the defense is an oral presentation with visual aides. You’ll be able to explain your research findings, go through your conclusions, and highlight new ideas & solutions.

At any time, the Committee can challenge you with questions, so you should be prepared to defend your conclusions. But this process is not as frightening as it sounds!

• If you’ve been in close contact with the Committee throughout the dissertation, they will be aware of your work.
• Your faculty advisor will help you decide when you’re ready for the final defense.
• You can also attend the defenses of other Ed.D. students to learn what questions may be asked.

Be aware that the Committee has the option to ask for changes before they approve your dissertation. After you have incorporated any notes from the Committee and addressed their concerns, you will finalize the draft, submit your dissertation for a formal review, and graduate.

Ed.D. Dissertation Format: 5 Chapters

Chapter 1: introduction.

Your Doctor of Education dissertation will begin with an introduction. In it, you’ll be expected to:

• Provide an overview of your educational landscape
• Explain important definitions & key concepts
• Define a real-world topic/problem of practice
• Outline the need for new studies on this topic

Chapter 2: Literature Review

The literature review is a summary of existing research in the field. However, it is not an annotated bibliography. Instead, it’s a critical analysis of current research (e.g. trends, themes, debates & current practices). While you’re evaluating the literature, you’re also looking for the gaps where you can conduct original research.

Sources for a literature review can include books, articles, reports, websites, dissertations, and more. Our section on Resources for Ed.D. Dissertation Research has plenty of places to start.

Chapter 3: Research Methodology

In the research methodology, you’ll be expected to explain:

• The purpose of your research
• What tools & methods you plan to use to research your topic/problem of practice
• The design of the study
• Your timeline for gathering quantitative & qualitative data
• How you plan to analyze that data
• Any limitations you foresee

Chapter 4: Results & Analysis

Chapter 4 is the place where you can share the results of your original research and present key findings from the data. In your analysis, you may also be highlighting new patterns, relationships, and themes that other scholars have failed to discover. Have a look at real-life Examples of Ed.D. Dissertations to see how this section is structured.

Chapter 5: Discussions & Conclusions

The final chapter of your Ed.D. dissertation brings all of your work together in a detailed summary. You’ll be expected to:

• Reiterate the objectives of your dissertation
• Explain the significance of your research findings
• Outline the implications of your ideas on existing practices
• Propose solutions for a problem of practice
• Make suggestions & recommendations for future improvements

Ed.D. Dissertation FAQs

What’s the difference between a dissertation and a thesis.

• Dissertation: A dissertation is a 5-chapter written work that must be completed in order to earn a doctoral degree (e.g. Ph.D., Ed.D., etc.). It’s often focused on original research.
• Thesis: A thesis is a written work that must be completed in order to earn a master’s degree. It’s typically shorter than a dissertation and based on existing research.

How Long is a Ed.D. Dissertation?

It depends. Most Ed.D. dissertations end up being between 80-200 pages. The length will depend on a number of factors, including the depth of your literature review, the way you collect & present your research data, and any appendices you might need to include.

How Long Does it Take to Finish an Ed.D. Dissertation?

It depends. If you’re in an accelerated program , you may be able to finish your dissertation in 2-3 years. If you’re in a part-time program and need to conduct a lot of complex research work, your timeline will be much longer.

What’s a Strong Ed.D. Dissertation Topic?

Experts always say that Doctor of Education students should be passionate about their dissertation topic and eager to explore uncharted territory. When you’re crafting your Ed.D. dissertation topic , find one that will be:

• Significant

See the section on Examples of Ed.D. Dissertations for inspiration.

Do I Have to Complete a Traditional Dissertation for an Ed.D.?

No. If you’re struggling with the idea of a traditional dissertation, check out this guide to Online Ed.D. Programs with No Dissertation . Some Schools of Education give Ed.D. students the opportunity to complete a Capstone Project or Dissertation in Practice (DiP) instead of a 5-chapter written work.

These alternatives aren’t easy! You’ll still be challenged at the same level as you would be for a dissertation. However, Capstone Projects & DiPs often involve more group work and an emphasis on applied theory & research.

What’s the Difference Between a Ph.D. Dissertation and Ed.D. Dissertation?

Have a look at our Ed.D. vs. Ph.D. Guide to get a sense of the differences between the two degrees. In a nutshell:

• Ed.D. dissertations tend to focus on addressing current & real-world topics/problems of practice in the workplace.
• Ph.D. dissertations usually put more emphasis on creating new theories & concepts and even completely rethinking educational practices.

How Can I Learn More About Ed.D. Dissertations?

Start with the section on Examples of Ed.D. Dissertations . You can browse through titles, abstracts, and even complete dissertations from a large number of universities.

If you have a few Doctor of Education programs on your shortlist, we also recommend that you skim through the program’s Dissertation Handbook . It can usually be found on the School of Education’s website. You’ll be able to see how the School likes to structure the dissertation process from start to finish.

Ed.D. Dissertation Support

University & campus resources, dissertation chair & committee.

The first port of call for any questions about the Ed.D. dissertation is your Dissertation Chair. If you get stuck with a terrible faculty advisor, talk to members of the Dissertation Committee. They are there to support your journey.

University Library

An Ed.D. dissertation is a massive research project. So before you choose a Doctor of Education program, ask the School of Education about its libraries & library resources (e.g. free online access to subscription-based journals).

Writing Center

Many universities have a Writing Center. If you’re struggling with any elements of your dissertation (e.g. editing), you can ask the staff about:

• Individual tutoring
• Editorial assistance
• Outside resources

Mental Health Support

It’s well-known that doctoral students often face a lot of stress & isolation during their studies. Ask your faculty advisor about mental health services at the university. Staff in the School of Education and the Graduate School will also have information about on-campus counselors, free or discounted therapy sessions, and more.

Independent Dissertation Services

Dissertation editing services: potentially helpful.

There are scores of independent providers who offer dissertation editing services. But they can be expensive. And many of these editors have zero expertise in educational fields.

If you need help with editing & proofreading, proceed with caution:

• Start by asking your Dissertation Chair about what’s permitted for third party involvement (e.g. you may need to note any editor’s contribution in your dissertation acknowledgments) and whether they have any suggestions.
• The Graduate School is another useful resource. For example, Cornell’s Graduate School maintains a list of Editing, Typing, and Proofreading Services for graduate students.

Dissertation Coaches: Not Worth It

Dissertation coaches are defined as people who offer academic & mental support, guidance, and editorial input.

• That means the person who should be your coach is your Dissertation Chair/Faculty Advisor. Remember that faculty members on the Dissertation Committee can also provide assistance.
• If you’re looking for extra support, you might consider consulting a mentor in your line of work and collaborating with fellow Ed.D. students.

But hiring an independent Ed.D. dissertation coach is going to be an absolute waste of money.

Dissertation Writing Services: Just Don’t!

Universities take the dissertation process  very seriously . An Ed.D. dissertation is supposed to be the culmination of years of original thought and research. You’re going to be responsible for the final product. You’re going to be defending your written work in front of a phalanx of experienced faculty members. You’re going to be putting this credential on your résumé for everyone to see.

If you cheat the process by having someone else write up your work, you will get caught.

Ed.D. Dissertation Resources

Examples of ed.d. dissertations, dissertation databases.

• Open Access Theses and Dissertations
• ProQuest Dissertations & Theses
• EBSCO Open Dissertations

Ed.D. Dissertations

• USF Scholarship Repository: Ed.D. Dissertations
• George Fox University: Doctor of Education
• UW Tacoma: Ed.D. Dissertations in Practice
• Liberty University: School of Education Doctoral Dissertations
• University of Mary Hardin-Baylor: Dissertation Collection

Ed.D. Dissertation Abstracts

• Michigan State University: Ed.D. Dissertation Abstracts

Ed.D. Dissertation Guides & Tools

General ed.d. guides.

• SNHU: Educational Leadership Ed.D./Ph.D. Guide

Dissertation Style Manuals

• Chicago Manual of Style

Style manuals are designed to ensure that every Ed.D. student follows the same set of writing guidelines for their dissertation (e.g. grammatical rules, footnote & quotation formats, abbreviation conventions, etc.). Check with the School of Education to learn which style manual they use.

Examples of Ed.D. Dissertation Templates

• Purdue University: Dissertation Template
• Walden University: Ed.D. Dissertation Template

Each School of Education has a standard dissertation template. We’ve highlighted a couple of examples so you can see how they’re formatted, but you will need to acquire the template from your own university.

Literature Review Guides

• UNC Chapel Hill: Writing Guide for Literature Reviews
• University of Alabama: How to Conduct a Literature Review

Resources for Ed.D. Dissertation Research

Journal articles.

• EBSCO Education Research Databases
• Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)
• Emerald Education eJournal Collection
• Gale OneFile: Educator’s Reference Complete
• Google Scholar
• NCES Bibliography Search Tool
• ProQuest Education Database
• SAGE Journals: Education

Useful Websites

• Harvard Gutman Library: Websites for Educators
• EduRef: Lesson Plans

Educational Data & Statistics

• Digest of Education Statistics
• Education Policy Data Center (EPDC)
• ICPSR Data Archive
• National Assessment of Educational Progress
• National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)
• UNESCO Institute for Statistics

• Franklin University |
• Help & Support |
• Locations & Maps |

• | Research Guides

To access Safari eBooks,

• Select not listed in the Select Your Institution drop down menu.
• Enter your Franklin email address and click Go
• click "Already a user? Click here" link
• Enter your Franklin email and the password you used to create your Safari account.

Continue Close

Ed.D.: Doctor of Education in Organizational Leadership

• Education Research
• Scholarly Research
• GoogleScholar
• Doctoral Writing Guide This link opens in a new window
• Annotated Bibliography Resources
• Literature Review This link opens in a new window
• APA Style Guide This link opens in a new window
• Research Methods

Dissertation Databases

Dip resources, citi training.

• Dissertation
• RefWorks This link opens in a new window
• Doctoral FAQs

Franklin Dissertation Resources

• Franklin University Doctoral Resources Doctoral Studies Resource documents, including the dissertation handbook and guide to submitting your dissertation are available on the Office of Academic Scholarship page.
• Franklin University Student Dissertations View former Franklin student's dissertations in the OhioLINK ETD Center.

• Electronic Theses and Dissertation Center (OhioLINK) This link opens in a new window Online theses and dissertations from Ohio graduate students.
• Open Access Theses and Dissertations This link opens in a new window Information about and links to freely-available full-text to almost almost 3.5 million graduate theses and dissertations from over 1,100 colleges, universities, and research institutions.
• Open Dissertations This link opens in a new window Open access database providing both historic and contemporary dissertations and theses. Includes content of the American Doctoral Dissertations database, which provides more than 153,000 theses and dissertations from 1902 to the present, as well as additional dissertation information provided by colleges and universities from around the world. Includes links to full-text from free platforms where available.
• ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global This link opens in a new window Doctoral dissertations and theses from around the world, spanning from 1743 to the present day and offering full text for graduate works added since 1997, along with selected full text for works written prior to 1997. It contains a significant amount of new international dissertations and theses both in citations and in full text.
• WorldCat Dissertations and Theses This link opens in a new window Catalog of dissertations, theses and published material based on theses, worldwide.
• CPED Dissertation in Practice Find sample dissertations in practice from institutions that are members of the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED)

Doctoral students are required to prepare a research proposal for their dissertation study. All doctoral projects that involve human subjects must be reviewed and approved by Franklin University's Institutional Review Board (IRB) to ensure the rights and welfare of human participants are protected. The research proposal will be included in the IRB application.

Anyone who conducts human subjects research at Franklin University must complete training before any research activities commence and before submitting a research proposal to the IRB for review. The Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) provides an online training course to satisfy this requirement and must be completed by all faculty, staff, and students involved in human subjects research. CITI educational courses help researchers to understand their obligations to protect the rights and welfare of human subjects in research. 

Please take the following steps to complete your CITI training: 

• Log on to the CITI homepage: www.citiprogram.org and click on the Register link. You will register with Franklin University in this seven-step process. Please use your Franklin University email address, which will link your CITI record to Cayuse IRB.
• Franklin learners must complete the Social and Behavioral Research (SBE) course. Additional elective courses are available but not required to conduct human subjects research at the University. The SBE course will take a few hours to complete, but you are not required to complete all modules in one sitting. 

Completing the CITI course will keep your training current for three years, after which time you will be required to complete a refresher course that updates your training for another three years. You will receive an email reminder from CITI when it is time to refresh your training. If your training expires during any human subjects research project, you must cease all research activities until your training has been updated.

• Institutional Review Board (IRB) Office For questions or issues with CITI Training, please contact the Franklin University IRB Office. Email: [email protected] Phone: 614.947.6037
• << Previous: Research Methods
• Next: RefWorks >>
• Last Updated: Feb 20, 2024 10:18 AM
• URL: https://guides.franklin.edu/EdD

5 Tips for Choosing Your EdD Dissertation Topic

Faculty Insights Industry Advice Education

Associate teaching professor Corliss Thompson shares her top tips for choosing your EdD dissertation topic.

You’ve learned more about why you should earn your Doctor of Education (EdD), and now you’re ready to apply. As part of the Northeastern application process, however, you’re required to submit a problem of practice that you want to pursue throughout the course of your doctoral program.

But how do you arrive at that problem of practice and narrow your area of interest down into a specific dissertation topic? Here are some tips to keep in mind.

Download Our Free Guide to Earning Your EdD

Learn how an EdD can give you the skills to enact organizational change in any industry.

DOWNLOAD NOW

Tips for Choosing a Dissertation Topic

1. pick a topic you’re passionate about..

A lot of work goes into your dissertation—from the literature review, where you’re conducting a critical analysis of what’s been published on your topic, to interviewing stakeholders and actually writing the dissertation itself. Each of those steps take time, so you want to choose a topic that will keep you engaged and hold your interest.

When trying to decide your area of focus, consider the challenges you’re motivated to address and the difference you want to make both during and at the end of your EdD program. The goal is that you will continuously build off your dissertation research and leverage the work in a way that positively impacts your organization and/or community.

2. Ensure your topic is manageable.

You want to select a topic you can complete during the duration of your EdD program that is also aligned with your budget. If you need to travel or perform longitudinal research, your idea might not be achievable. Find what available, attainable data you can, and use that to narrow down your research into a dissertation that’s more manageable.

3. Embrace the unknown.

Although you’re passionate about your topic and it’s manageable, there will still be lingering questions about your subject. Be prepared to explore what you don’t know and deepen what you already do know. Strong research typically results in more questions.

Be ready to ask questions of yourself, others, and the literature, and get comfortable with not knowing the answer. As you’re thinking about your dissertation, keep track of inquiries that emerge around different ideas. Those may help you hone in on a topic.

4. Leverage your peers.

One benefit of enrolling in an EdD program is the diversity of backgrounds and opinions you’ll find within your cohort. At Northeastern, EdD instruction is primarily online, which enables students to connect and collaborate with professionals from around the world.

Vasiliki Goudanas Mavroudhis, a recent graduate of Northeastern’s EdD program, emphasized this benefit in her piece on what it’s like to be in an online doctoral program , saying:

The ability to not only have a cohort-based network, but one that crossed cohorts and continents, allowed me to have a far richer and deeper experience. I learned from students with different perspectives who came from different industries across a number of countries.

When fleshing out your dissertation, use that global network to your advantage. Ask your peers for constructive feedback. It’s likely they’ll have suggestions on how you can approach your topic from different cultural perspectives.

5. Know it’s OK to change your topic.

It’s natural for your dissertation topic to evolve the more research you complete and experts you interview. Actually, it’s expected.

Switching topics halfway through the program might seem like more work, but you will have already gone through the research process once and laid the foundation for your dissertation. As you approach your topic from different perspectives, it’s understandable if your own viewpoint changes a bit.

If you’re in need of inspiration, here are some examples of doctoral research Northeastern students have recently conducted:

• “The Drop Out Decisions of Latino College Students”
• “Changing the Experiences of African Refugee Youth”
• “Supporting Students Through Mindful Mentoring”
• “The Transitioning Student Veteran: Finding Your Civilian Career Through Academic Success”
• “Bridging the Gap Between Training and Educating in Adult Learning”
• “Watch out for Shards from the Glass Ceiling: A Study of Women Higher Educational Administrators’ Leadership Development Experiences”

Subscribe below to receive future content from the Graduate Programs Blog.

About corliss thompson, phd, related articles.

What is Learning Analytics & How Can it Be Used?

Reasons To Enroll in a Doctor of Education Program

Why I Chose to Pursue Learning Analytics

Did you know.

The median annual salary for professional degree holders is $97,000. (BLS, 2020)

Doctor of Education

The degree that connects advanced research to real-world problem solving.

Most Popular:

Tips for taking online classes: 8 strategies for success, public health careers: what can you do with an mph, 7 international business careers that are in high demand, edd vs. phd in education: what’s the difference, 7 must-have skills for data analysts, in-demand biotechnology careers shaping our future, the benefits of online learning: 8 advantages of online degrees, how to write a statement of purpose for graduate school, the best of our graduate blog—right to your inbox.

Stay up to date on our latest posts and university events. Plus receive relevant career tips and grad school advice.

By providing us with your email, you agree to the terms of our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Keep Reading:

The 8 Highest-Paying Master’s Degrees in 2024

Graduate School Application Tips & Advice

How To Get a Job in Emergency Management

Join Us at Northeastern’s Virtual Graduate Open House | March 5–7, 2024

Capstone Documents: EdD Doctoral Study

• Supplemental Resources for the PhD Social Work
• DBA Capstone: Traditional Capstone Options
• DBA Capstone: Portfolio Project Options
• DBA Capstone: Consulting Capstone Option
• DHA Doctoral Study (Summer 2021 or before)
• DIT Doctoral Study
• DNP Doctoral Project
• Doctor of Nursing Program Capstone Resources
• DNP Capstone Resources NURS 8702 and NURS 8703
• DPA Doctoral Study
• DrPH Doctoral Study
• DSW Doctoral Study
• EdD Doctoral Study
• PsyD Doctoral Study
• Doctoral Prospectus Resources This link opens in a new window
• Oral Defense
• Capstone Committee Process
• Doctoral Prospectus Resources
• DHS Doctoral Study
• DHA Doctoral Study Landing Page
• DHA Doctoral Study (Fall 2021 or after)
• Previous Page: DSW Doctoral Study
• Next Page: PsyD Doctoral Study

EdD Doctoral Study Procedures and Documents

Welcome to the EdD Page—EdD Doctoral Study Process and Documents—on the Office of Research and Doctoral Services’s website. On this page, you will find the resources you need to complete the EdD capstone study.

EdD Capstone Process and Planning Documents

• Design Alignment Tool
• Completing the Design Alignment Tool Tutorial

EdD Prospectus Development and Evaluation

• EdD Prospectus Form November 2023
• Examples of Aligned Studies
• 5 Whys for Achievement Issues
• Topics Appropriate for Your Specialization
• Committee Matching Form 6/14/2023
• Office Hours for Prospectus Development Spring 2024
• Walden Live Learning Link
• EdD Coordinators for Specializations
• Research Design & Data Analysis Office Hours

Oral Defense Information

• Oral Defense Information & Request Forms

Capstone Checklists – Please select the correct checklist for your capstone type

• EdD Dissertation Checklist - Qualitative March 2024
• EdD Dissertation Checklist - Quantitative March 2024
• EdD Dissertation Checklist - Mixed Methods March 2024
• EdD Project Study Checklist – Qualitative March 2024
• EdD Project Study Checklist – Quantitative March 2024
• EdD Project Study Checklist – Mixed Method March 2024

Capstone Rubrics

• EdD Minimum Standards Rubric
• EdD Final Quality Rubric

Questions?  [email protected]

Social Media

Connect with the office of research and doctoral services.

• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

Advertisement

Analyzing Theories, Conceptual Frameworks, and Research Methods in EdD Dissertations

• Original Paper
• Published: 27 May 2022
• Volume 66 , pages 721–728, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

• Swapna Kumar   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1151-7593 1 ,
• Kara Dawson 1 ,
• Rhiannon Pollard 2 &
• Gage Jeter 1  

1439 Accesses

2 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Dissertation guiding principles and purposefully designed research curriculum guide the conceptualization and structure of dissertations in the EdD in Educational Technology at a large university in the US. An analysis of 69 dissertations completed by the first five cohorts over ten years was conducted to determine the theories, frameworks, and research designs used by professional students to conduct Educational Technology research in diverse contexts. The results indicated that students carefully assembled literature from various areas that reflect the diversity of disciplines and professional contexts in which dissertations were conducted, created and used conceptual frameworks that successfully provide a roadmap for research, adopted a variety of research approaches with mixed methods and qualitative approaches used more than quantitative approaches, and explicitly articulated processes for rigor and trustworthiness. Implications for program design and curriculum improvement are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The instrumental value of conceptual frameworks in educational technology research.

Connecting practice, theory and method: Supporting professional doctoral students in developing conceptual frameworks

Educational design research: grappling with methodological fit

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

Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher , 34 (6), 3–15

Bourner, T., Bowden, R., & Laing, S. (2001). Professional doctorates in England. Studies in Higher Education, 26 (1), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070124819

Article   Google Scholar  

Dawson, K., & Kumar, S. (2014). An analysis of professional practice Ed.D. dissertations in educational technology. TechTrends, 58 (4), 62–72

Franke, A., & Arvidsson, B. (2011). Research supervisors’ different ways of experiencing supervision of doctoral students. Studies in Higher Education, 36 (1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903402151

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking and computer conferencing: A model and tool to assess cognitive presence. American Journal of Distance Education, 15 (1), 7–23

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). https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2019.85

Grulke, E. (2019). Investigating conceptions of mathematics and approaches to learning of first-year college students engaging in online discussions . Doctoral Dissertation, University of Florida.

Guskey, T. R. (1998). The age of our accountability: Evaluation must become an integral part of staff development. Journal of Staff Development, 19 (4), 36–44

Google Scholar  

Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of instructional development, 10 (3), 2–10

Kirkpatrick, D., & Kirkpatrick, J. (2006). Evaluating training programs: The four levels . Berrett-Koehler Publishers

Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action: Applying modern principles of adult education . Jossey-Bass

Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational researcher, 28 (2), 16–46

Kumar, S. (2014). A systematic approach to the assessment of impact in a professional doctorate. Higher Education, Skills and Work-based Learning, 4 (2), 171–183. https://doi.org/10.1108/HESWBL-10-2013-0020

Kumar, S., & Antonenko, P. (2014). Connecting practice, theory and method: Supporting professional doctoral students in developing conceptual frameworks. TechTrends, 58 (4), 54–61

Kumar, S., & Coe, C. (2017). Online mentoring and student support in online doctoral programs. American Journal of Distance Education, 31 (2), 128–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2017.1300464

Kumar, S., & Dawson, K. (2018). An online doctorate for researching professionals: Program design, implementation and evaluation.  Athabasca University Press. http://www.aupress.ca/index.php/books/120272

Kumar, S., Dawson, K., Black, E. W., Cavanaugh, C., & Sessums, C. D. (2011). Applying the community of inquiry framework to an online professional practice doctoral program.  International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12 (6), 126–142. https://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/978

Kumar, S., & Ochoa, M. N. (2012). Program-integrated information literacy instruction for online graduate students.  Journal of Library & Information Services in Distance Learning, 6 (2), 67–78

Kumar, S., Kumar, V., & Taylor, S. (2020).  A guide to online supervision.  United Kingdom Council of Graduate Education (UKCGE). Retrieved from http://www.ukcge.ac.uk/media/download.aspx?MediaId=2268

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (2001). Legitimate peripheral participation in communities of practice. Supporting lifelong learning (pp. 121–136). Routledge

Ma, V. W., Dana, N. F., Adams, A., & Kennedy, B. L. (2018). Understanding the problem of practice: An analysis of professional practice EdD dissertations. Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 3 (1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2018.50

MacLennan, H., Piña, A., & Gibbons, S. (2018). Content analysis of DBA and PhD dissertations in business. Journal of Education for Business , 93 (4), 149–154

Marsh, D. D., Dembo, M. H., Gallagher, K. S., & Stowe, K. H. (2010). Examining the capstone experience in a cutting edge EdD program. In J. Gaetane & A. Normore (Eds.), Educational leadership preparation: Innovation and interdisciplinary approaches to the EdD and graduate education (pp. 203–235). Palgrave Macmillan

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Maxwell, T. W. (2009). Producing the professional doctorate: The portfolio as a legitimate alternative to the dissertation. Innovations in Education and Teaching International , 46 (2), 135–145

Mezirow, J. (1998). On critical reflection. Adult Education Quarterly, 48 (3), 185–198

Moore, M. G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 22–38). Routledge

Perry, J. A. (2013). Carnegie project on the education doctorate: The education doctorate-A degree for our time. Planning and Changing, 44 (3/4), 113

Richards, J., Dykeman, C., & Bender, S. (2018). Content, methodology, and design selections in counselor education dissertations. Journal of Counselor Leadership and Advocacy , 5 (1), 27–44

Ritzhaupt, A. D., Valle, N., & Sommer, M. (2020). Design, development, and evaluation of an online statistics course for educational technology doctoral students: A design and development case. Journal of Formative Design in Learning, 4 (2), 119–135

Shulman, L. S., Golde, C. M., Bueschel, A. C., & Garabedian, K. J. (2006). Reclaiming education’s doctorates: A critique and a proposal. Educational Researcher, 35 (3), 25–32

Stufflebeam, D. (2000). CIPP evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (2nd ed.). Springer

Wetzel, K., & Ewbank, A. (2013). Conceptualizing the innovation: Factors influencing doctoral candidates’ interventions in the action research dissertation. Educational Action Research, 21 (3), 392–411

Willis, J., Inman, D., & Valenti, R. (2010). Completing a professional practice dissertation: A guide for doctoral students and faculty . Information Age

Zambo, D. (2014). Theory in the service of practice: theories in action research dissertations written by students in education doctorate programs. Educational Action Research, 22 (4), 505–517

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Education, University of Florida, PO Box 117048, Gainesville, FL, 32611, USA

Swapna Kumar, Kara Dawson & Gage Jeter

University of Florida, 302 Tigert hall , PO Box 113245, Gainesville, FL, 32611-3245, USA

Rhiannon Pollard

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Swapna Kumar .

Ethics declarations

Ethical statement.

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Florida.

Conflict of Interest

There are no potential conflicts of interests. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kumar, S., Dawson, K., Pollard, R. et al. Analyzing Theories, Conceptual Frameworks, and Research Methods in EdD Dissertations. TechTrends 66 , 721–728 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00739-4

Download citation

Accepted : 13 April 2022

Published : 27 May 2022

Issue Date : July 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00739-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Examining EdD Dissertations in Practice: The Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate

IHR Note:  We are proud to present this second article in the fifth annual volume of the  International HETL Review  (IHR) with the academic article contributed to the February issue of IHR by  Drs. Valerie Storey, Mickey Caskey, Kristina Hesbol, James Marshall, Bryan Maughan and Amy Dolan . In this action research study, the authors, members of the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) Dissertation in Practice Awards Committee have examined the format and design of dissertations submitted as a part of the reform of the educational doctorate. Twenty-five dissertations submitted as part of this project were examined through surveys, interviews and analysis to determine if the dissertations had changed as a result of the project and re-design with the participating programs. Their results raise questions about distinctiveness of Educational and professional doctorates, as compared to PhDs and the criteria to “demonstrate new knowledge” in the dissertation process.

Valerie A. Storey University of Central Florida, U.S.A.

Micki M. Caskey Portland State University, U.S.A.

Kristina A. Hesbol University of Denver, U.S.A.

James E. Marshall California State University, Fresno, U.S.A.

Bryan Maughan University of Idaho, U.S.A.

Amy Wells Dolan University of Mississippi, U.S.A.

In 2007, 25 colleges and schools of education (Phase I) came together under the aegis of the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) to transform doctoral education for education practitioners. A challenging aspect of the reform of the educational doctorate is the role and design of the dissertation or Dissertation in Practice. In response to consortium concerns, members of the CPED Dissertation in Practice Awards Committee conducted this action research study to examine the format and design of Dissertations in Practice submitted by (re) designed programs. Data were gathered with an online survey, interviews, analyses of 25 Dissertations in Practice submitted in 2013 to the Committee. Results indicated few changes occurred in the final product, despite evidence of change in the Dissertation in Practice process. Findings contribute to debates about the distinctive nature of EdDs (and of professional doctorates generally) as distinct from PhDs, and how about the key criteria for demonstrating “new knowledge to solve significant problems of practice” are demonstrated through the dissertation submission.

Keywords : Dissertation in Practice, Professional Doctorate, Doctoral Thesis, Education Doctorate

Introduction

During the past decade, epistemological and philosophical debates have surrounded the EdD (Caboni & Proper, 2009; Guthrie, 2009; Shulman 2005, 2007; Zambo, 2011). These debates focus on the source, depth, and type of knowledge doctoral students need to become reflective practitioners and effective school leaders (Andrews & Grogan 2005; Evans 2007; Shulman 2005, 2007; Shulman, Golde, Bueschel, & Garabedian, 2006), and the different roles of the EdD (Doctor of Education) and PhD (Doctor of Philosophy) programs failing in delivering these outcomes (Caboni & Proper, 2009; Guthrie, 2009). Some postulated that the programs were indistinguishable in some higher education institutions (Guthrie, 2009; Shulman 2005, 2007; Shulman et al., 2006). Levine (2005) observed that the EdD lacked its own identity, failing to prepare school leaders who understand real school problems with the ability to take action and make effective, lasting change. Additionally EdD graduates often fail to impact students and teachers in their schools (Murphy & Vriesenga, 2005), declining to turn theory into practice, change practice, or challenge the status quo (Evans, 2007).

In 2007, institutional members of the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) came together to re-imagine and redesign the EdD (Perry & Imig, 2008), clearly differentiating the Professional Practice Doctorate (EdD) from the PhD. A major outcome was the culminating EdD experience, validating the scholarly practitioner’s ability to solve Problems of Practice, and demonstrating the doctoral candidate’s ability “to think, to perform, and to act with integrity” (Shulman, 2005, p. 52).

In this article, we first set the study context, illustrating the epistemological and philosophical debates relating to the EdD, focusing on Dissertations in Practice (DiPs). Next, we discuss the developing design of DiPs, reflecting new models of educational research that emerge from Problems of Practice (PoPs). Finally, we report an action research study in which we investigated exemplar DiPs, nominated by 54 Phase I and II institutions, for the annual Dissertation in Practice Award. The purpose of the study was to generate valuable insights about the nature of professional practice doctorate dissertations.

The Association of American Colleges and Universities define the EdD as a terminal degree, presented as an opportunity to prepare for academic, administrative, or specialized positions in education. The degree favorably places graduates for leadership responsibilities or executive-level professional positions across the education industry (National Science Foundation, 2011). At most academic institutions where education doctorates are offered, the college or university chooses to offer an EdD, a PhD, or both (Osguthorpe & Wong, 1993). However, Shulman et al. (2006) contended that EdD and PhD programs are not aligned with their distinct theoretical purposes, and that poorly structured programs, marked by confusion of purpose, caused the EdD to be viewed as “PhD Light,” rather than a separate degree for a separate profession (p. 26).

Expanding Role of Influence

CPED encourages Schools of Education to reclaim the education doctorate (Shulman et al., 2006; Perry & Imig, 2008; Walker, Golde, Jones, Bueschel, & Hutchings, 2008) by developing EdD programs with scholarly practitioner graduates. The program design includes a set of courses, socialization experiences, and emphases that are distinct from those conventionally offered in PhD programs (Caboni & Proper, 2009; Guthrie, 2009). Bi-annual, three-day CPED convenings include graduate students, college deans, clinical faculty, teachers, college professors, and school administrators from member institutions. The first convening in Palo Alto, CA (June 2007), attended by 25 invited institutions, set the tone for future convenings by orchestrating an exchange of information with colleagues, grounded in a spirit of scholarly generosity, ethical responsibility, and integrity.

CPED Institutions, Phase 1, 2007-2010

A second group of institutions responded to a call for CPED membership in 2010. The call, open members of the Council for Academic Deans of Research Education Institutions (CADREI), included institutional commitments outlined in a Memorandum of Understanding. Identified as Phase II institutions, 26 new universities joined the consortium, beginning their work of EdD re-design at the fall convening held at Burlington, Vermont in 2011.

CPED Institutions, Phase II, 2011-2013

An ongoing discussion has centered on the nature of the final capstone of CPED influenced programs which Hamilton et al., (2010) suggest helps invigorate the use of a traditionalacademic tool. Many Phase 1 institutional members are farther into their programmatic implementation, with cohorts who have graduated and completed a DiP. Still, iterative questions abound among CPED institutions regarding the nature, scope, impact, and format of the DiP (Sands et al., 2013), as institutions learn from graduating cohorts (Harris, 2011).

CPED Institutions, Phase III, 2014

In April 2014, the consortium’s membership increased to 84, including two universities from Canada and one from New Zealand.CPED’s commitment to support institutional flexibility in the DiP design presents difficulty sorting out issues of rigor, and advancing common understandings about the nature of problems of practice (Sands et al., 2013). An informal survey of current CPED institutions (CPED, 2013) identified culminating projects including white papers, articles for publication, monographs, electronic portfolios, and the traditional five chapter dissertation document.

Not surprisingly, the consortium has struggled to reach consensus on a DiP definition. Several drafts have been distributed on the consortium’s web site inviting feedback and comment. The current version is, “The Dissertation in Practice is a scholarly endeavor that impacts a complex problem of practice” (CPED, 2014). What is agreed upon by the consortium is that the DiP is focused on practice, and that local context matters. Faculty in EdD programs must have a clear sense of the nature of problems in practice among their constituent base, appropriate types of inquiry used to address those issues, and the manner in which results can be conveyed in authentic, productive ways (Sands et al., 2013).

Key Principles and Components of an Innovative DiP

The nature and format of the DiP diverge (Archbald, 2008; CPED, 2012; Sands et al., 2013). The first major discussion about the attributes of the CPED DiP occurred at the second convening (Fall, 2007), at Vanderbilt University (Storey & Hartwick, 2010). Peabody College faculty and recent program graduates described their DiP’s client-based process. Faculty expressed that the DiP’s primary objective is to provide a program candidate with an opportunity to show they are informed and have the critical skills and knowledge to address complex educational problems (Smrekar & McGraner, 2009). They indicated that the EdD candidate could exemplify a skill set including deep knowledge and understanding of inquiry, organizational theory, resource deployment, leadership studies, and the broad social context associated with problems of educational policy and practice (Caboni & Proper, 2009). Faculty asserted that while DiPs may vary by focus area, geographical location, institutions (school, district, agency, association), and scope (case study, systematic review, program assessment, program proposal), all share common characteristics related to rigorous analysis in a realistic operational context (Smrekar & McGraner, 2009). In the convening’s keynote speech, Guthrie (2009) argued that if capstone requirements for research and practice are the same in EdD and PhD programs, then program purposes, research preparation, and practitioner professional training have been woefully compromised.

During the Fall 2012 convening, consortium members tackled the development of a set of standards and criteria to assess the DiP. Questions regarding the requirements of DiP remained, however. In response to a proposed standard that the DiP “is expected to have generative impact on the future work and agendas of the scholar practitioner” (CPED, 2012), members asked, “What is meant by generative impact? Is this doable in a dissertation capstone?” Members wondered if APA was the appropriate stylistic guide for the formatting of final products, and whether blogs, websites, graphic novel, or YouTube videos were appropriate products (Sands et al., 2013).

Participants at the 2009 convening developed six Working Principles to guide the consortium’s work (Perry & Imig, 2010):

The professional doctorate in education:

• Is framed around questions of equity, ethics, and social justice to bring about solutions to complex problems of practice.
• Prepares leaders who can construct and apply knowledge to make a positive difference in the lives of individuals, families, organizations, and communities.
• Provides opportunities for candidates to develop and demonstrate collaboration and communication skills to work with diverse communities and to build partnerships.
• Provides field-based opportunities to analyze problems of practice and use multiple frames to develop meaningful solutions.
• Is grounded in and develops a professional knowledge base that integrates both practical and research knowledge, that links theory with systemic and systematic inquiry.
• Emphasizes the generation, transformation, and use of professional knowledge and practice.

These principles guide institutions as they develop the DiP’s conceptual foundation. Scholarly practitioners blend practical wisdom with professional skills and knowledge to name, frame, and solve problems of practice. They disseminate work in multiple ways, with an obligation to resolve problems of practice by collaborating with key stakeholders, including the partners from schools, community, and the university. The second CPED principle, inquiry as practice, poses significant questions focused on complex problems of practice. By using various research, theories, and professional wisdom, scholarly practitioners design innovative solutions to improve problems of practice. Inquiry of Practice requires the ability to gather, organize, judge, aggregate, and analyze situations, literature, and data with a critical lens (Sands et al., 2013). The final CPED principle relates directly to the DiP as the culminating experience that demonstrates the scholarly practitioner’s ability to solve problems of practice and exhibit the doctoral candidate’s ability “to think, to perform, and to act with integrity” (Shulman, 2005, p. 5).

In 2012, CPED formed a DiP Award Committee to develop assessment criteria for DiPs nominated for the CPED DiP of the Year Award, and to review submitted DiPs for the award. To develop the assessment criteria, the committee drew on Archbald’s (2008) work, which specified four qualities that a reimagined EdD doctoral thesis should address: (a) developmental efficacy, (b) community benefit, (c) stewardship of doctoral values, and (d) distinctiveness of design. In arguing for a problem solving study, Archbald advised that unlike a research dissertation, findings are not the goal. Rather, the problem-based thesis’ goals are decisions, changed practices, and better organizational performances.

At the June 2012 convening, hosted by California State University (Fresno), the DiP committee guided members in a Critical Friends activity, “Defining Criteria for a Dissertation in Practice”. Subsequently, the 2012 DiP Committee developed and circulated the draft criteria, inviting feedback from CPED members.

At the October 2012 convening, hosted by at The College of William and Mary, the DiP Award Committee proposed their assessment criteria and requested additional feedback from CPED colleagues (CPED, 2013). The assessment rubric was revised, responsive to the feedback, and was circulated to a wider consortium membership for public comment on CPED’s website. Review of this feedback led to item criteria refinement along with performance indicators:

• Demonstrates an understanding of, and possible solution to, the problem of practice. (Indicators: Demonstrates an ability to address and/or resolve a problem of practice and/or generate new practices.)
• Demonstrates the scholarly practitioner’s ability to act ethically and with integrity. (Indicators: Findings, conclusions and recommendations align with the data.)
• Demonstrates the scholarly practitioner’s ability to communicate effectively in writing to an appropriate audience in a way that addresses scholarly practice. (Indicators: Style is appropriate for the intended audience.)
• Integrates both theory and practice to advance practical knowledge. (Indicators: Integrates practical and research-based knowledge to contribute to practical knowledge base; Frames the study in existing research on both theory and practice.)
• Provides evidence of the potential for impact on practice, policy, and/or future research in the field. (Indicators: Dissertation indicates how its findings are expected to impact professional field or problem.)
• Uses methods of inquiry that are appropriate to the problem of practice. (Indicators: Identifies rationale for method of inquiry that is appropriate to the dissertation in practice; effectively uses method of inquiry to address problem of practice.)

The DiP Award Committee conducted two rounds of review for the DiP Annual Award, applying the above assessment criteria.

What Makes a Professional Practice DiP?

In this section, we turn to the international community for guidance in answering two major issues concerning the CPED Award Committee as they wrestled with the assessment criteria. First, what should a DiP look like? Second, how should DiP potential impact be measured?

Numerous national and international bodies govern qualifications and specifications for what doctoral level work should look like, e.g., European University Association (2005), Council of Deans and Directors of Graduate Studies, Australia (2007), Council of Graduate Schools (2008), Quality Assurance Agency (2012). Common to all is the emphasis on critical assessment of the originality of findings presented in the dissertation in the context of the literature and the research. Fulton, Kuit, Sanders and Smith (2013) drew on their experience teaching in a Professional Practice Doctoral program at the University of Sunderland in England, concluding that the “ability to design research objectively and logically, and then to critically review and evaluate findings, is what makes it doctoral level, not the actual findings themselves” (p.152). In their view, the difference between a PhD and a Professional Practice Doctorate is the demonstration of knowledge production that makes a significant contribution to the profession. O’Mullane (2005) noted that while the structure of a DiP may be similar to that of a PhD dissertation, it should contain additional reflective elements relating to personal reflections on the learning journey. But the question remains, what should a DiP look like? O’Mullane (2005) identified six outputs currently used by universities to demonstrate a significant contribution to the profession:

• Thesis or dissertation alone;
• Portfolio and/or professional practice and analysis;
• A reflection and analysis of a significant contribution to knowledge over time or from one major work;
• Published scholarly works recognized as a significant and original contribution to knowledge;
• Portfolio and presentation (performance in music, visual arts, drama); and
• Professional practice and internship with mentors.

These six DiP designs can be found within CPED; a group DiP design is also being explored. Universities are offering several DiP design choices: (a) Baylor University’s DiP can be thematic, assessment, action research, or three articles; (b) California State University San Marcos’ DiP can be a policy brief, executive summary, or series of articles; (c) Rutgers University’s DiP can be thematic, assessment, three article, action research, portfolio, or 3 “products” tied together with an introduction and conclusion; and (d) the University of Arkansas’ DiP can be an executive summary and article submission for publication in a peer reviewed scholarly journal (CPED data, 2013). O’Mullane (2005) also identified the essentials of a DiP:

• Create new knowledge.
• Make a significant contribution to your profession.
• Explicit conceptual framework.
• Literature review should provide the context to the research question, and should demonstrate that the question is worth asking.
• Demonstrable evidence of how ideas have been synthesized in the light of experience and in the context of academic literature, and how this has created new knowledge.
• Demonstration that findings have been reflected on, logically planned, and progressed through the research.
• Independently construct arguments for and against the findings and use evidence to support your interpretation.
• A distinctive voice should be clearly heard although what is said should be supported by evidence.
• Use the university’s designated reference style consistently. (pp.149-150)

Fulton et al. (2013) suggested that “the creation of new knowledge and significant contribution” are critical, and likely to give any DiP assessor the most difficulty. Not only does “the creation of new knowledge and significant contribution” vary between professions, but the opportunity to influence a profession also tends to be based on position and length of service. To bring clarity to the problem of “significant contribution,” O’Mullane (2005) suggested two classifications, active or inactive, in terms of contribution to the profession. An active contribution generates new significant knowledge, which results in significant improvement in practice. An inactive contribution generates significant knowledge that has not yet been disseminated.

Current Rhetoric and Reality of DiPs: An Action Research Study Methods of the Study

For this action research study (Lewin, 1944; Stringer, 2007), we gathered data from an online survey from the eight member DiP Award Committee. Members came from a variety of institutions; four had previous Dissertation Award Committee experience with American Education Research Association special interest groups. The authors of this paper were among those who provided data.

Quantitative and qualitative data were gathered using a Qualtrics administered survey with Likert responses and assessors’ comments. Each survey item was scored 1 to 4, with 1 indicating “unacceptable,” 2 “developing,” 3 “target,” and 4 “exceptional”.

Each member of the committee responded to an email invitation to complete a blind review of four DiP synopses submitted by the nominated candidate. Two committee members assessed each synopsis against the assessment item criteria, with a third assessment by the committee chair, as needed. Based on the quantitative scores and qualitative comments of the synopses, the pool was narrowed from 25 to 6 DiPs. A second blind review of the full text of the six DiPs was conducted with each committee member reading the full DiP and submitting criteria assessment data in Qualtrics.

Limitations

The authors of this paper are DiP Award Committee members, which could cause bias in interpretation. The committee members’ initial judgments were based on the submitted synopses; some may not have adequately represented the overall DiPs quality. The sample was neither random nor sufficiently large to draw generalizable conclusions. 14 DiPs came from three Phase 1 institutions. While not surprising that most submissions came from Phase 1 institutions, multiple submissions from any institution was unexpected.

Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics were calculated for each DiP synopsis assessed on the six CPED assessment items (Table 1). Item means ranged from 2.78 to 2.94 with an overall mean of 2.86. The median was 3 (“Target”) for each of the six items and the mode was 3 (“Target”) for all items except item #5, where the mode was 2.

Table 1. Item Statistics for the DiP Award Assessment Survey

Across the range of 300 individual responses (2 reviewers x 25 dissertations x 6 survey items), a 1 (Unacceptable) was selected only four times, while 4 (Exceptional) was selected 50 times. The remaining 246 responses were either a 2 (Developing) or 3 (Target), indicating considerable restriction of range at both ends of the scale. As for measures of central tendency, the median of 3 (Target), and a grand mean of 2.86, indicate that overall, reviewers found the DiP to be near “Target” based on the review criteria.

Figure 1 shows a frequency distribution of total scores for the 25 DiPs submitted for review. The numbers on the X-axis represent a unique identifier for the 25 reviewed DiPs. The scale ranged from 0-48 possible points (6 items of the survey x 4 maximum points allowed x 2 reviewers). The observed scores ranged from 25 to 45 with no obvious natural breaks in the distribution.

Figure 1 . Frequency distribution of scores across 25 DiPs synopses. Prior to scoring, the DiP Award Committee predicted that an analysis of the score distribution might reveal a natural break that could be useful to narrow the pool for further review. Because there were no obvious natural breaks, the committee, after careful review of both the quantitative and the qualitative data, agreed that the top six scoring DiPs would move forward for a full text review.

The format of 24 DiPs was the traditional (five chapter) dissertation, with one non-traditional chapter. All had single authors. Two submissions implemented results of their study and showed immediate impact. The average page length of the 25 DiPs was 212, with a range of 85-377 pages. Four studies used quantitative methods, 17 used qualitative methods, and four used mixed methods. The methodology used in 10 studies was action research, case studies, grounded theory, and phenomenology.

In additional to numerical rating, the DiP Committee members commented on quality and overall alignment with the DiP assessment criteria. For DiPs that received similar, or identical marks, committee members reviewed the reflective comments, re-read the synopses, and continued meetings via Skype, Adobe Connect, or by phone. The inclusion of quality data provided a point of reference to triangulate perspectives regarding the eventual five finalists.

Critical reflections and subsequent comments can often appear somewhat tenuous. Elements of ambiguity may exist in such reviews, and reviewers may be guilty of overgeneralizing. As the process continued, a clear inter-rater agreement (Creswell, 2013) was evident among committee members.

The qualitative data confirmed the quantitative findings. Regarding those dissertations where the mean was closer to the “exceptional” category, some reviewers stated:

• A timely paper and excellent report
• Good example of an important problem of practice
• High potential for impact
• Meaningful and insightful
• Well-developed
• Important examples of a problem of practice
• Good interdisciplinary foundation

A characteristic of all submitted DiPs was addressing immediate needs in practice. Some were assessments of existing programs; others delved into theoretical constructs and inquired about their applicability to educational issues within the local, regional, or national context. Among these studies, a few took their inquiry directly into the classroom. While the DiPs that rose to the top during the review process were regarded by their submitting institutions as exemplary, not all addressed all of the assessment criteria in their synopsis.

Critical assessment of the DiPs indicated that most CPED member institutions remain unclear about what constitutes an exemplary DiP. While the conclusions drawn from the 2009 Peabody convening asserted that all share a set of common characteristics related to rigorous analysis in a realistic operational setting (Smrekar & McGraner, 2009), the DiP Award Committee’s analysis of 25 submissions revealed a continuum of alignment to the Working Principles for Professional Practice Programs.

Discrepancy in alignment to the Working Principles may be indicative of an analogous disconnect between the central principles that were developed by the consortium to guide all programs in 2009 and what is, in reality, being practiced currently among Phase I and II CPED institutions. The assumption that these principles would be tested during Phase II seems to be flawed, borne out by the analysis of the 2013 data.   Alternately, the discrepancy in alignment to the Working Principles may also reflect the need for additional refinement and discussion around the rubric used for review by the DiP Award Committee. Again, because the rubric evolved from a community-based process, further refinements may require similar processes of discussion and recommendation from the broader constituency.

Many of the DiP submissions lacked clear evidence of impact on practice, a characteristic that is foundational to the Working Principles. While submissions demonstrate the author’s ability to generate solutions, whether a complex problem of practice had been identified in the studies was unclear in a majority of the submissions. Additionally, it was unclear in most submissions whether the author included implications for generative solutions at the local and/or broad context. Drawing on the work of Bryk, Gomez, and Grunow (2010), the six Core Principles of Improvement Science suggest the following:

• Make the work problem-specific and user-centered.
• Variation in performance is the core problem to address.
• See the system that produces the current outcomes.
• We cannot improve at scale what we cannot measure.
• Anchor practice improvement in disciplined inquiry.
• Accelerate improvements through networked communities.

Concluding Remarks

The analysis of DiPs and the narrative presented is indicative of both the challenges institutions face and their pervasiveness, as faculty wrestle with the design of a professional practice doctorate program. While challenging, the identification of common issues provides an opportunity for institutions to engage in conversation with others that appear to have found solutions to some of the challenges. Such conversation is a start to ensuring program rigor and consistency at both a national and international level. Learning in situ develops praxis in education. At the core, the creation of generative knowledge forms a substantive epistemology that guides the construction of meaning and builds confidence in decision makers.

To re-imagine and redesign the EdD will require innovation, a commitment that has now been made by the growing membership of CPED, now collaborating on a global stage to rethink the fundamental purpose of doctoral education with specific focus on the professional practice doctorate, the EdD.

Andrews, R., & Grogan, M. (2005). Form should follow function: Removing the EdD. dissertation from Ph.D. straightjacket. UCEA Review , 46(2), 10–13.

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.

Bryk A. S., Gomez L. M. & Grunow A. (2010). Getting ideas into action: Building networked improvement communities in education. Stanford, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

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

Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate. (2012). Consortium members . Retrieved from http://cpedinitiative.org/consortium-members

Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate. (2013). Dissertation in Practice of the Year Award . Retrieved from http://cpedinitiative.org/dissertation-practice-year-award

Council of Australian Deans and Directors of Graduate Studies. (2007). Guidelines on professional doctorates. Adelaide, Australia: Council of Australian Deans and Directors of Graduate Studies. Retrieved from https://www.gs.unsw.edu.au/policy/findapolicy/abapproved/policydocuments/05_07_professional_doctorates_guidelines.pdf

Council of Graduate Schools. (2008). Task force report of the professional doctora te. Washington, DC: Author.

European University Association. (2005). Salzburg Principles, as set out in the European Universities’ Association’s (EUA) Bologna Seminar report. Retrieved from http://www.eua.be/eua/jsp/en/upload/Salzburg_Conclusions.1108990538850.pdf

European University Association. (2005). Salzburg principles, as set out in the European Universities’ Association’s (EUA) Bologna seminar report. Retrieved from http://www.eua.be/eua/jsp/en/upload/Salzburg_Conclusions.1108990538850.pdf

Evans, R. (2007). Comments on Shulman, Golde, Bueschel, and Garabedian: Existing practice is not the template. Educational Researcher, 36 (6), 553–559. Doi: 10.3102/0013189X07313149 in S.I.

Fulton, J., Kuit, J., Sanders, G., & Smith, P. (2013). The professional doctorate: A practical guide. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Guthrie, J. (2009). The case for a modern Doctor of Education Degree (EdD.): Multipurpose education doctorates no longer appropriate. Peabody Journal of Education, 84 (1), 2–7.

Hamilton, P., Johnson, R., & Poudrier, C. (2010). Measuring educational quality by appraising theses and dissertations: Pitfalls and remedies. Teaching in Higher Education, 15 (5), 567–577.

Harris, S. L. (2011). Reflections on the first 2 years of a doctoral program in educational leadership. In S. Harris (Ed.). The NCPEA handbook on doctoral programs in educational leadership: Issues and challenges. Retrieved from Open Educational Resources Commons website: http://www.oercommons.org/courses/reflections-on-the-first-2-years-of-a-doctoral-program-in-educational-leadership.

Levine, A. (2005). Educating school leaders . Washington, DC: The Education Schools Project. Retrieved from www.edschools.org .

Lewin, K. (1944). The solution of a chronic conflict in industry. Proceedings of the Second Brief Psychotherapy Council. Reprinted in B. Cooke & J. F. Cox (Eds.), Fundamentals of action research , volume I, pp. 3–17. London: Sage.

Murphy, J., & Vriesenga, M. (2005). Developing professionally anchored dissertations: Lessons from innovative programs. School Leadership Reviews, 1 (1), 33–57.

National Science Foundation. (2011). Numbers of doctorates awarded in the United States. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf12303/

Osguthorpe, R. T., & Wong, M. J. (1993). The PhD versus the EdD: Time for a decision. Innovative Higher Education, 18 (1), 47–63.

O’Mullane, M. (2005). Demonstrating significance of contribution to professional knowledge and practice in Australian professional doctorate programs: Impacts in the workplace and professions. In T.W. Maxwell, C. Hickey, & T. Evans (Eds), Working doctorates: The impact of professional doctorates in the workplace and professions. Geelong, Victoria, Australia: Deakin University.

Perry, J. A., & Imig, D. G. (2008, November/December). A stewardship of practice in education. Change, 42­–48.

Perry, J. A., & Imig, D. G. (2010, May). Interrogation of outcomes of the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.

Quality Assurance Agency. (2012). UK quality code for higher education. Part B: Assuring and enhancing academic quality, Chapter B11: Research degrees . Retrieved from http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Documents/Quality-Code-Chapter-B11.pdf

Rivera, N. (2013).  Cooperative Learning in a community college setting: Developmental coursework in mathematics . Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ. Retrieved from CPED Dissertation in Practice Award Winner website: http://cpedinitiative.org/news-item/2013-dissertation-practice-year-award-winners-honorable-mentions-announced

Sands, D., Fulmer, C., Davis, A., Zion, S., Shanklin, N., Blunck, R. Ruiz-Primo, M. (2013). Critical Friends’ perspectives on problems of practice and inquiry in an EdD program. In V.A. Storey (Ed.), Redesigning professional education doctorates: Applications of critical friendship theory to the EdD (pp. 63­–81). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

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

Shulman, L. S. (2007). Practical wisdom in the service of professional practice. Educational Researcher , 36, 560–563. Doi: 10.3102/0013189X07313150

Shulman, L. S., Golde, C. M., Bueschel, A. C., & Garabedian, K. J. (2006). Reclaiming education’s doctorate: A critique and a proposal. Educational Researcher, 35 (2), 25–32.

Smrekar, C., & McGraner, K. (2009). From curricular alignment to the culminating project: The Peabody College EdD capstone. Peabody Journal of Education, 84 (1), 48–60.

Storey, V. A., & Hartwick, P. (2010). Critical friends: Supporting a small, private university face the challenges of crafting an innovative scholar-practitioner doctorate. In G. Jean-Marie & A. H. Normore (Eds.), Educational leadership preparation: Innovative and interdisciplinary approaches to the EdD and graduate education . New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.

Stringer, E.T. (2007). Action research (3 rd ed.). London, UK: Sage Publication.

Walker, G. E., Golde, C. M., Jones, L., Bueschel, A. C., & Hutchings, P. (2008). The formation of scholars: Rethinking doctorial education for the twenty-first century. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

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

This feature article was accepted for publication in the International HETL Review (IHR) after a double-blind peer review involving three independent members of the IHR Board of Reviewers and two revision cycles. Accepted for publication in July 2014 by Dr. Lorraine Stefani (University of Auckland, New Zealand), IHR Senior Editor.

Suggested citation:

Storey, V. A., Caskey, M. M., Hesbol, K. A., Marshall, J. E., Maughan, B., & Dolan, A. W. (2014). Examining EdD dissertations in practice: The Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate. International HETL Review , Volume 5, Article 2. https://www.hetl.org/examining-edd-dissertations-in-practice-the-carnegie-project-on-the-education-doctorate

Copyright [2015] V. A. Storey, M. M. Caskey, K. A. Hesbol, J. E. Marshall, B. Maughan and A. W. Dolan.

The authors assert their right to be named as the sole authors of this article and to be granted copyright privileges related to the article without infringing on any third party’s rights including copyright. The authors assign to HETL Portal and to educational non-profit institutions a non-exclusive licence to use this article for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The authors also grant a non-exclusive licence to HETL Portal to publish this article in full on the World Wide Web (prime sites and mirrors) and in electronic and/or printed form within the HETL Review . Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the authors

Opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and as such do not necessarily represent the position of other professionals or any institution. By publishing this article, the author affirms that any original research involving human participants conducted by the author and described in the article was carried out in accordance with all relevant and appropriate ethical guidelines, policies and regulations concerning human research subjects and that where applicable a formal ethical approval was obtained.

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

About the author: patrick blessinger.

Related Posts

The Smartphone project: Digital tools to promote university students’ psychological well-being

Emotional dialogue via video-mediated communications technologies: A network analysis of influencing factors

Online collaborations extending reflective deliberations in the virtual hallway

Mapping the Transformative Journey of Graduate Students

• 1-888-SNU-GRAD
• Daytime Classes

What You Need to Know: SNU’s Dissertation Process

Earning a doctoral degree is no longer a pie-in-the-sky aspiration. In less than 32 months, SNU’s EdD in Administration and Leadership prepares you to become an expert leader in your organization and inspire meaningful change. Plus, you can choose to complete this program entirely online or in-person.

But if you’re like many students considering a doctorate , the first thing that comes to mind is the daunting dissertation. You’ve heard stories about how much work it is and wonder how you could possibly fit that into your life and schedule.

At SNU, we use what’s called an embedded dissertation process, allowing you to start chipping away at it from day one—rather than dreading it until the end. Beyond the support of your cohort , you’ll also have an entire team of faculty and administrators to guide you through the journey.

To give you the clarity you need, we’ve answered 10 common questions about our dissertation process and what you can expect.

What does “embedded dissertation” mean?

In our EdD program, the dissertation is completed simultaneously as you complete coursework. A traditional doctoral program follows a format of completing coursework while leaving the dissertation at the end. At SNU, you’ll begin working on your dissertation from the beginning. Many courses have dissertation components that build into the completed study by the time you graduate. There are 15 three-hour courses and 12 hours of dissertation for a total of 57 hours to complete the program.

How does the dissertation process work?

You will begin the process of identifying a topic to study in the first course of the program—and begin building a research collection around a problem that exists in your field related to the topic. Many courses in the program have dissertation components built into the assignments, discussions, and course content. Dissertation courses have a specific set of requirements to be completed each semester during the 32-month program. 

Do I need to have a dissertation topic before I enroll?

No, you do not need a dissertation topic to enroll, but it is highly recommended to at least have an idea for a topic. Your assigned dissertation director will work closely with you to identify a researchable topic and help you to refine the problem statement, which is the foundation of your study. 

Am I on my own in the dissertation process?

You are not on your own as a student in this program . You’ll have an assigned Dissertation Director and an assigned Dissertation Chairperson at the appropriate time. In addition, you’ll have an editor on your dissertation committee who will assist with aligning academic writing skills on the graduate level and the application of APA 7th edition.

Can I really complete the coursework and dissertation in just 32 months?

Yes, you can complete the coursework and dissertation in the 32 months if all timelines and criteria are met for coursework and dissertation requirements. The Dissertation Directors will guide you through the process so all requirements for completion are communicated.

How much time will I spend each week on course work?

This number will vary depending on the individual student. Generally speaking, an average of 10-12 hours per week is necessary to be successful in the program. The amount of time spent could also depend on the specific course, the timeframe of the program requirements, and the individual student. 

What if I need extra help with my writing?

You will have a Dissertation Editor to assist with academic writing voice and the alignment of APA. However, if you need assistance with writing skills, the program has professional editors who may be contracted with (on their own) to assist with overall writing.

What if I have a vacation or conference planned during a course?

Attendance and engagement in a doctoral program is imperative and required in this program. However, we all understand there are times when professional or personal events happen. If you’re taking classes in-person, you will need to make arrangements with your instructor if you need to be away and possibly Zoom into class. You will be expected to continue meeting assignment deadlines even if you are unable to attend class. If you choose to enroll fully online, you can take your classes and coursework with you wherever you go.

How many students will be in my classes?

The cohort model can range from 14 to 24. Our average cohort size in the doctoral program is approximately 18 students, but this number can vary. 

Will we ever have to meet in-person?

If you’re part of an online cohort, you will not be required to attend or meet in-person, but we do have an optional orientation at SNU in Bethany, Oklahoma before the cohort begins. We also have an optional summer post-orientation weekend after the first and second years for the online students to attend. The Dissertation Directors also use Zoom for meetings to update and stay connected with the online cohorts.

You have what it takes.

Fitting a doctoral program in your life has never been easier. There will always be reasons to keep putting it off. But with built-in support from SNU and a determined focus to reach your goals, you have what it takes. When it comes to balancing a busy life, you don’t have to compromise. Choose a university that enables you to live life more fully with a degree program you can manage.

Want to learn more about SNU's programs?

Request more information.

Have questions about SNU, our program, or how we can help you succeed. Fill out the form and an enrollment counselor will reach out to you soon!

Subscribe to the SNU blog for inspirational articles and tips to support you on your journey back to school.

Recent blog articles.

Physician Assistant Program on Track for January 2025 Start Date

Adult Education

Exploring the Path to Teaching: Addressing Common Questions

Building Special Ed Leaders: A Deep Dive into SNU's MAASE Program

What is unique about the MBA program at SNU?

Have questions about SNU or need help determining which program is the right fit? Fill out the form and an enrollment counselor will follow-up to answer your questions!

Text With an Enrollment Counselor

Have questions, but want a faster response?  Fill out the form and one of our enrollment counselors will follow-up via text shortly!

Digital Commons @ George Fox University

Home > EDT > EDD

Doctor of Education (EdD)

Dissertations from 2024 2024.

An Intervention for Increasing School Administrators’ Preparedness and Capacity to Supervise Idea and 504 Programs , Dana Christie

The Impact of Strategic, Skill-Focused Intervention on First Grade Students Identified as "At Risk" For Dyslexia: An Improvement Science Dissertation In Practice , Stephanie Clawson

The Relationship Between Number Talks, Multiplicative Fraction Reasoning, and Student Mathematical Self-Efficacy , Amanda Davidson

The Influence of Peer Feedback on Office Discipline Referrals In Unstructured Settings , Amber Duncan

Development of a Nursing Clinical Evaluation Instrument Using the Cipp Model , Carolyn W. Milburn

Supporting New Teacher Self-efficacy in Two-way Immersion Programs , Jordan Mills

Understanding the Successes and Challenges of a Dual Language Program , Mariela Mireles

Culturally Responsive Teaching: High School Teachers Reflecting on Multicultural and Global Education , Giselle Pardo de Rincón

Impact of South Coast to Valley (SC2V) Regional Educator Network on Educator Personal and Professional Practice: A Program Evaluation Study , Amber Ryerson

Exploring the Implications: The Impact of Universal Design for Learning on Student Engagement and Motivation in Diverse Classroom Environments , Hilary Sanguinetti

Understanding Teacher Perceptions Around Feedback , Cari Ann Sloan

Improving the Ninth Grade On-Track For Native American Students , Charles Summers

Teaching Professionalism Skills to Secondary Students: An Improvement Science Dissertation on the Efficacy of a Professionalism Skills System: An Improvement Science Study , James Weber

Using a Decision-making Process to Determine Where to Relocate a Newer Dual Language Program , Laura C. Weiss

Enhancing Staff Satisfaction: Exploring the Efficacy of Peer Observation as an Improvement Science Approach to Professional Learning for Elementary Educators , Brian Wood

Dissertations from 2023 2023

Literary Types: How Literature Helped Inspire Healing and Joy in my Classroom and Beyond, a Narrative , Donald R. Anderson

An Analysis of the Suitability of Philosophy as a Core K-12 Public School Subject , Mark Christopher Blythe

A Conceptual Analysis and Variable Identification Study of First-Language Attrition , Neil Edward Cantrall

Using Online Video Observations and Real Time, Peer Reflective Analysis of Culturally Responsive Teaching Pedagogy in a University Teacher Preparatory Program for Preservice Teachers , Adrian E. Cortes

An Exploration of Teacher Attrition Factors in Oregon Christian Schools , Zachary Davidson

An Implementation Evaluation of Social and Emotional Skills Curricula in a Cohort Model , Lancelot Falcon

Enabling Conditions for Safety System Implementation by Leaders in a Southern California School District: An Improvement Science Study , Shelah Feldstein

Demystifying Preservice Teacher Reflective Thinking: A Systematic Literature Review , Joan Flora

A Phenomenological Study of Educator Perceptions of Social-Emotional Learning Following the COVID-19 Pandemic , Allison Haulton

Practice Habits of Instrumental Music Students in Elementary School VAPA Programs: An Empirical Mixed-Methods Survey , Timothy Johnson

An Evaluation of Social Emotional Learning Curricula and their Effect on 4th Grade Students' Emotional Regulation , Jared Larson

General Education Teachers and Students with Disabilities: Using Targeted Information and Delivery Methods to Improve Perceptions of Preparedness in Inclusion Models , Kaitlyn Lemos

Alternative Settings for Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disabilities , Jamie Logan

Improving Fidelity of Implementation of a Tier I Phonics Program: an Improvement Science Study , David B. Mack

The Formation of a Guide for Licensed Educators Supervising and Supporting Paraeducators in Special Education , Catherine Parry

The Impact of Social-Emotional Team Huddles on Educational Leaders' Wellbeing: An Improvement Science Study , Jennifer Lambie Patterson

Examining Motivation and Self-Efficacy in Reading and Writing in Seventh Grade English: An Improvement Science Dissertation in Practice , Jennifer Tuttle

A Handbook for Community College Deans: Foundations, Frameworks, and Day-to-Day Resources for Leaders of Two-Year Institutions of Higher Education , Thomas James Wilkins-Luton

An Improvement Science Approach to Reducing Dual Language Immersion Student Attrition Through Ongoing Parent Learning Activities , Shannon Zavala

Dissertations from 2022 2022

Mathematics Achievement and Native Language Within Dual Immersion Programs , Cristina Alcaraz-Juarez

The Impact of Empathy-Building Activities: Implementing the Anti-Defamation League's No Place for Hate Program , Heidi Blackwell

CTE Instructor Retention: Considering the Factors Impacting Turnover and How Use of Funding Affects Instructor Satisfaction , Matt Boase

"Why Stay?" Experiences of Persistence in Former Education Support Staff who become Second-Career Teachers , Christine Bullock

Improving Student Satisfaction and Wellbeing in an International Baccalaureate Program: An Improvement Science Study , Michael Fisher

Lived Experiences of Liberal and Conservative Educational Leaders Navigating Solutions to Highly Contentious and Polarizing Sociopolitical Education Problems , Troy Fisher

An Examination of Peer-led Professional Development in Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports , Sarah E. Flynn

The Impact of Social-Emotional Curriculum Training on Oregon 4th-8th Grade School Teachers' Emotional Intelligence , Tiffany Marie Fotre

The Correlation Between Rural Oregon High School Students' SAT and ASVAB Scores with High School GPA, Gender, Race, and Ethnicity, and SES as Moderators , Kelly Garvin

New Teachers Enacting Culturally Relevant Pedagogy in Literacy Instruction , Sarri A. Gibson

An Exploration of Elementary Mathematical Performance during the COVID-19 Pandemic , Rachel Sunshine Herron

A Professional Teacher Disposition, Defined and Assessed Through Peer Reviewed Literature from 1985 to 2021: A Narrative Review , John Hynes

Hired, Not Retained, and Leaving Drained: Assembling Teacher Attrition Through Drama Theory and Theatre of the Oppressed in Nevada K-12 Schools , Jonathon M. Josten

A Descriptive Analysis of the Impact of Mindfulness-Based Intervention for Public Educators During COVID-19 , Amy Joynt

Rethinking Grading: Exploring High School Teachers' Experiences with Changing to a Nontraditional Grading System , Sarah E. Leonard

A Multiple Case Study Exploring CTE Faculty Members’ Account of Working with ID Professionals in the Course Design Process , Nicole Lewis

A Multiple Case Study of Oregon’s K-12 Accountability Transformation: A Journey to include Outcome Mapping , Shay Mikalson

Exploring the Relationship Between College Mathematics Remediation Status and Continued Persistence in Mathematics of Community College Students , Morvarid Javadi Pourhassan

Exploring Student Teacher's Lived Experiences with Supervisor Feedback , Kristin M. Rich

Grade Determination: An Exploration of High School Teacher Cognitive Processes , Bonnie Robbins

Paraeducator Experience Participating in Professional Development: a Phenomenological Perspective , Loren K. Sickles

Corporate Gaslighting: Can Isolated Training Help? A Narrative Study , Jade Singleton

A Phenomenological Investigation of Nurse Faculty Commitment , Timothy A. Yett

Dissertations from 2021 2021

Safety Department Officers' Perceptions: Concealed Carry and the Imposed Risk on Campus , Alaina R. Adkins-Armstrong

A Case Study of White Professors' Culturally Responsive Practice in a Dominant Cultural Higher Education Setting , Zhiqiong Ai

The Impact of Using Social Media Platfrom WeChat for Formative Feedback of Teaching and Learning on Student Satisfaction , Suxia Chen

A Multiple-Case Study Examining the Experiences of Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Teachers in Grow Your Own Programs , Emily Couch

Licensed Educator Perceptions of the Use of Mission, Vision, and Values to Guide Daily School Operations: A Qualitative Study , Adaline K. Fraser

A Phenomenological Study of Community College Career and Technical Education Graduates' Perceptions of the Impact of Online Delivery on Their Employability Skills Preparation , Jarett John Gilbert

Improving Student Engagement in a Digital Environment: An Improvement Science Study , Christopher Scott Gragg

A Qualitative Study of Contributing Factors of Early Career Teacher Burnout , Mindi Ann Helmandollar-Armatas

Improving Student Engagement Through Instructional Design During the COVID-19 Pandemic , Jill Kirksey - Diehl

Exploring Educators' Perspectives on Empathy and Equity through a Role-Play Game Experience , Jennifer Kleiber

A Case Study of English as Foreign Language Chinese Teachers' Use of Computer-Based Technology , Lingao Li

Portraits of Meaning Attached to a Rural School Through the Community It Serves , Dena Jo Palmaymesa

People Leaders and Change Managers: Perspectives from the Middle , John Regier

Increasing Social and Emotional Learning Competencies Through Use of Tabletop Role-Playing Games , Tia Ruff

Exploring Rural Teachers' Perceptions of the Achievement of Professional Agency in the Context of a School District Mandated Pedagogical Reform , Janice Marie Scudder

Efficacy of Culturally Responsive Teaching with the 7 Cs within an Educational Alternative Services High School English Class , Mark A. Simon

"You Don't Have to be a Head Teacher": Perceptions of Long-Term Male Elementary Teachers on Why They Stay in the Classroom , Maranda Turner

Dissertations from 2020 2020

The Impact of Socioeconomic Status, Race/Ethnicity, and English Learner Status in Predicting Student Placement with an Individual Education Plan During the Third Through Eighth Grades , John Burch

A Critical Phenomenological Study of Female Asian American Leadership in Higher Education , Jenny L. Elsey

Understanding Hispanic Women's Emotional and Social Presence Experiences: Case Studies of Three Undergraduate Online Learners , Angel Krause

A Case Study of Christian School Parents Who Work in Public Schools , Timothy C. Lehman

An Exploratory Data Analysis Study of Open Education Resources in Dental Hygiene Education , Jessica Luebbers

"Some Days We Don't Learn Anything New": A Phenomenological Study of Intellectually Gifted Elementary Students , Frank Luzaich

The Relationship Between Social Science Majors' Quantitative-Course Experience and Their Quantitative Anxiety , Kelly McIntyre

The Lost Boys: A Phenomenological Study of Freshmen Year Failure , Holly Miele

Exploring How Second-Career Teachers Construct a New Professional Identity: A Narrative Inquiry Study , Bethany Pflug

When's the Payoff?: A Narrative Inquiry into Adjunct Faculty Experiences , Tiffany Sarkisian

Christian Higher Education Faculty's Perceptions of Occupational Stress, Job Demands, and Job Resources as Predictors of Job Burnout , Michelle E. Shelton

The Association Between Teacher Self-Efficacy, Teacher Motivation and the Implementation of Project-Based Learning (PBL) Teaching Methods , John Spencer

A Cross-study Exploration of Experiences of Induction Level Teachers Identified as Teacher Leaders , Elaine Tinholt

A Content Analysis of Dissertations on Business Topics: A Quantitative Study , Kat Yamamoto

Dissertations from 2019 2019

The Influence of a School-Based Health Center on Students and Teachers' Classroom Experiences: Stories Teachers Tell , Joseph D. Bridgeman

Exploring High School Seniors' Lived Experience of Teacher Empathy: A Phenomenological Study , Danielle Bryant

Exploring the Associations Among Self-Harm, Anxiety, and Suicidal Ideation in the American College Health Association National College Health Assessment II , Meagan Clark

A Microethnographic Study of Bilingual Teacher Candidates' Appropriation of Translanguaging , Jessica Dougherty

The Impact of Freshmen On-Track Status, Absenteeism, and Associated Demographic Variables on Four-Year Graduation Attainment within a Rural Community: A Predictive Validity Study , Joel Hoff

An Examination of the Psychometric Properties of the Mental Health Literacy Scale with K-12 Educators , Cassandra A. Kenney

A Multiple-Case Study of Chinese Student Teachers' Micropolitical Literacy in Teaching Practicum Conflicts in Chinese Contexts , Huiyin Li

The Predictive Validity of Mathematics Curriculum-Based Measurement on Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium Mathematics Scores , Lauren J. Merkel

An Exploration of Schooling Perceptions of Dual-Enrollment Students: A Qualitative Research Study , Helen Louise Milliorn-Feller

Examining the Help Seeking Experiences of Youth in Extended Care: A Narrative Ethnography Study , Sarah M. Pennington

Including Students with Emotional Disturbance: Teachers' Experiences , Kimberley Shearer

Student Perceptions on a Virtual Credit Recovery Program , Max O. Sigander

• Collections
• Disciplines

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS

Author Corner

• Why Publish in DC@George Fox?
• Doctor of Education at George Fox University

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement | Terms of Use

Privacy Copyright