June 08 Convening Home Day Two Summary Day Three Summary

Welcome Session, David Imig

During this convening, we aim to expand on Lee’s definition and idea of stewardship.

How do we create programs that:
encourage the development of these stewards?
inspire new ideas around professionalism?
create a worldwide conversation?

Looking at CPED:

Is it a 3 year program? Yes, for now, but we are looking for funding.
For now, our goal is to develop new models for Professional Practice Doctorates-->
- Share demonstration proofs
- Create candidate criteria
- Rethink the capstone experience
- Define core curricula
- Consideration of Qualitative Concerns for both Students and Faculty? this is a primary goal of our discussions and work
We are creating the conversation—we are building the national conversation

There are many more schools that want to join CPED . Among them are--University of Georgia, William and Mary; Boston University wants to join and look at how music and education intersect at the doctoral level

Some things that will occur during this convening:

Renewal of Commitment to this Work
Celebrating Accomplishments
Honor Lee Shulman
Welcome Tony Bryk
Embrace Stewardship
Create Proof Sites
Anticipate the 4th Convening

Sandra Robinson, from AACTE, spoke about AACTE's appreciation for the work we are doing and the interest we are generating in the field of education.

Also, Jill spoke briefly to walk the group through the new CPED Initiative website that is meant to serve two audiences – the general public and the CPED institutions and their work. Jill then reviewed the convening schedule and agenda.

Case Study:Virginia Commonwealth University's EdD in Leadership

Henry Clark & Charol Shakeshaft

Virginia Commonwealth University presented to the attending members of CPED their pilot program for a Professional Practice Doctorate and asked for critical feedback. Below is an overview of the program and the excercises for reflection in which the group engaged.

Context:

Relatively young university (1968)
Doctoral programs since 1980 – began with PhD
Degree seemed to be an educational mismatch for students
New EdD undermined the integrity of the PhD while also not meeting the needs of the EdD students
VCU wanted to develop a program that would create stewards of the discipline
Decided on a commitment to both the PhD and the EdD but needed to define the PhD (and then how to define the degree for professional practice)

Actions:

Formed an EdD sub-committee to look at change:
- Culture changes at the institutional level
- Changes in the admissions process
- Changing views of publishing with students and a developing sense of mentorship
Specifically choose a committee that consisted of:
- outside members
- insider faculty
- tenure faculty
- members from 5 different departments
- administrative members
Intentionally created a Doctorate in Leadership
Hired a new Chair for Leadership who would be part of the larger committee

Process of Getting There:

Explanation of the “Moon Roof Model” – involved the development of Top-Down supports for this process:
- Get upper administration informed, involved, and supportive
- Invited the Head of State Department of Higher Education to be part of the process
- Carnegie support
Top-Down Model Opened Doors:
- Empower faculty to create a program,
- BUT in no way dictate what that program will look like
Specified that this was NOT a degree in Educational Leadership, just in Leadership:
- About developing leaders
- Nothing is taken off the table
- Carnegie cannot dictate the process and elements; it can help to guide the program’s development but the ideas need to come out of the conversations and discussions of the faculty and committees involved
What do we want our leaders to look like?
- Data based decision making (and how to get to this point)
- Leadership is not individual – relationships are critical
- Communication and common creation needs to be learned
- Learn how to read context because solutions must be contextual
- Bring frames of reference to projects; organizations need to be reflective, equitable, and accountable
Moved towards Shulman’s work on Habits of Mind, Heart, and Hand

Case Study

Signature Pedagogy
- Analyze the Case Study
What’s the process by which people have asked these questions and tried to answer them?
Team-taught, year-long intensives
- Conduct Case Study
Now that we have picked the other cases apart, let’s do this cooperatively and on our own
Lab of Practice and Capstone – Case Study as a Programmatic Component

Stronger students in Educational Leadership (EdD)

(Be sure that this program is not admitting the same student as the PhD program)

University is asking for the MAT not the GRE
Prior to entering the program -
- Students need leadership experience
- Students need masters and/or certification

Faculty Still Ask…

Where are the research courses?
Why don’t you have a dissertation?
Leadership Organizations: Do you see this changing the nature of the PhD program and how many students you admit?
- Faculty have ‘early energy’ but this is a high commitment program and this needs to be anticipated by those who participate

VCU is admitting their first cohort into this new EdD in Leadership in Fall 2008

Leadership Doctorate housed in the Educational Leadership Department
- Who takes care of this program?
- On whose shoulders does this opportunity fall?
- How to deal with the worry that this program will be the PhD-lite (ex. using the MAT rather than the GRE for admission)

Case Study Group Discussion

Questions:

What are the threats to programmatic integrity that we should anticipate and how do we address those?
What inquiry skills are really needed?

Group 1 responses

Having a vision and frame of reference is necessary
Structure also helps to move away from vision
Integrity of the program—how do you have integrity with the mission or vision of what you have designed; integrity in the mentoring and the admission process—need to be aligned with the vision and the frame
Needs to be commitment of those involved—understand vision and adher to frame
Who is responsible for the integrity? Needs to be the keeper of the integrity and the accountability needs to part of the design
How do you vest the concept of integrity in more than one notion-challenge to institution and the profession.

Group 2 Responses

Rigor: what does that look like?
Are students really learning what they are suppose to learn to do before the dissertation?
Asked what is the architechure, the processes by which we answer the questions of what our students need to know.
Need to be some type of traditional course that get students ready to do the more interesting stuff—epistemology, methods, practical problems
How do you engage faculty and students into a an authentic understanding of research—how do I make decisions that are complicated in a complex world—more than methods, its framing the problem.
Some did backward mapping
Notions of adaptive inquiry
Introduce things with new terminology—explain things
Research rotations—take a similar issue and replicate it so you can perfect it

Group 3 Responses

Curriculum is framed but not defined—how do they move forward? do they go back to old practices? This is a threat.
Capacity—ability of faculty to engage in this program
Load this program might present for faculty given that there is shared responsibility
Learn how to identify problems and then to define solutions

Evening at Carnegie: Honoring Lee

On our first evening, CPED members came together for an evening of cocktails, socializing, and to honor Lee Shulman. As a reminder of our efforts, CPED members presented Lee with a large pair of Converse basketball sneakers, signed by all members to thank him for setting forth the path for us to walk in.