Wednesday, June 9th

1:15pm - Syllabus Exercise: Pairs and groups will share program syllabi and discuss development/implementation in a CPED-influenced Ed.D. program.

Group Pre-work Assignment: Bring 2 copies (for sharing) one syllabus from a course that is central to your new program.

Syllabus Exercise: How our course work shapes our goals and our teaching.

• What is the overall story or narrative you want to tell with this course?
• How does your syllabus contribute to preparing someone for practice-consider definition of profession, habits, etc
• How does this course foster a scholarly practitioner identity?
• How does this course connect your student to a scholarly practitioner community?
• What is the reading list? How does it differ from traditional EdD programs?
• What does this course say about you as a faculty member teaching it? Or the program as whole?

Summary of Discussion: How does this course foster a scholarly practitioner identity?

• Wrestle with complex problems
• Use systematic and systemic inquiry
• Use theory to understand problems
• Have a team effort-momentum/collaborative skills/complementary
• Example of a professional learning community
• Problem finding/clarification
• Team taught/different perspectives
• Encouraging use of research to solve authentic problems
• Transfer theory to practice
• Foster self-reflection of student's personal leadership style-theory
• To see student shift and change during the program
• Have students become scholarly-practitioners by using research to come up with research-based solutions
• Give students real opportunities to observe/apply theories
• Habits of mind:
• Synthesis drawing from a knowledge base of multiple sources
• Emphasis on problem finding as a place to start
• Higher level of communication skill
• Ability to see through multiple lenses
• Reading for multiple purposes
• Application application application
• Start with the end in mind re: capstone
• Instructional delivery
• Face-to-face
• Problem-based instruction
• Context-school districts served
• Authentic school district partnerships
• Collaboration-inside/outside
• Consumer + producer of research
• Coursework includes inquiry to deepen conceptual understanding
• Attention to extant research related to problems/questions of practice.
• Emphasis on reflection and mindful leadership
• Relationships btw field experience and scholarly presentations
• They contribute to the knowledge base necessary to act as scholarly-practitioners
• By providing the opportunity to apply the knowledge and skills in a laboratory of practice, the courses develop the foundation for assuming an inquiry stance
• They contribute to the skills base necessary to act as scholarly practitioners
• Understand history of practice and ideas
• Curriculum is more than compliance and practitioners have responsibility in raising issues
• Ability to critically evaluate and synthesize education literature to inform practice

3:45pm - Book Discussion

Valerie Storey, Lynn University
Group discussion of key readings for the preparation of Scholarly Practitioners

Group Pre-work Assignment: Each member, please bring one copy of one book that you think all professional practitioners in education should read.

The books that were suggested by consortium member that attended the convening are listed below.

The Formation of Scholars: Rethinking Doctoral Education for the Twenty-first Century
George Walker, Chris M. Golde, Laura Jones, Andrea Conklin Bueschel & Pat Hutchins (2007)

Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry. Jennifer Green (2007)

Action Research in Education. Ernest T. Stringer (2007)

Reframing organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership. Lee G. Boleman & Terrence E. Deal (2003)

School Reform Proposals: The Research Evidence. Alex Molnar (2002)

The Flat World and Education: How America's Commitment to Equity Will Determine Our Future. Linda Darling-Hammond (2009)

Inquiry as Stance: Practitioner Research for the Next Generation. Marilyn Cochran-Smith & Susan L. Lytle (2009)

The Political Mind. George Lakoff (2009)

Commonwealth. Michael Hardt & Anthony Negri (2009)

Organizing Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Anthony S. Bryk, Penny Bender Sebring, Elaine Allensworth, and Stuart Luppescu (2010)

Learning by Heart. Roland S. Barth (2004)

Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. John Hattie (2004)

Leadership: Theory and Practice. Peter G. Northouse (2009)

Turning Research into Results: A guide to Selecting the Right Performance Solutions. Richard E. Clark & Fred Estes (2008)

Additional books suggested by Virginia Commonwealth University

Carroll, S.R & Carroll, D.J. (2002). Statistics made simple for school leaders: Data-Driven decision making. Scarecrow Education, Inc.: Oxford, UK.

Cone, J. D. & Foster, S. L. (2006). Dissertations and theses: From start to finish, (2^nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Covey, S. R.. (1989, 2004). The 7 habits of highly effective people: Powerful lessons in personal change. New York: Free Press.

Donaldson, S. I., Christie, C. A., & Mark, M. M. (Eds.). (2009). What counts as credible evidence in applied research and evaluation practice? Los Angeles: SAGE.

Glatthorn, A. & Joyner, R. L. (2005). Writing the winning thesis or dissertation: A step-by-step guide, (3rd ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Halpern, B. L., & Lubar, K. (2004). Leadership presence: Dramatic techniques to reach out, motivate, and inspire. New York: Gotham Books.

Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads:  The mental demands of modern life.  Cambridge, MA:  Harvard Press.

Kegan,R. and Lahey, L.L. (2009). Immunity to change:  How to overcome it and unlock the potential in yourself and your organization. Boston:  Harvard Business Press.

Lencioni, Patrick (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team.  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Palmisano, D. J. (2008). On leadership: Essential principles for success. New York: Skyhorse Publishing.

Reynolds, G. (2008). Presentation Zen: Simple ideas on presentation design and delivery. New Riders Press: Berkeley, CA.

Sadker, D., & Zittleman, K. (2009). Still failing at fairness: How gender bias cheats girls and boys in school and what we can do about it. Simon & Schuster.

Skrla, L. E., McKenzie, K. B., & Scheurich, J. J. (2009). Using equity audits to create equitable and excellent schools.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Spaulding, D. T. (2008). Program evaluation in practice: Core concepts and examples for discussion and analysis. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Strike, K.A., Haller, E. J., and Soltis, J.F. (2005).  The ethics of school administration.

Stufflebeam, D. L., Madaus, G. F., & Kellaghan, T. (Eds.). (2000). Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (2^nd ed.). Boston: Kluwer Academic.

Tufte, E. (2001). The visual display of quantitative information, 2nd edition. Graphics Press: Cheshire, CT.

Vacca, R.S. and Bosher, Jr., W.C. (2008).  Law and education:  Contemporary issues and court decisions (7^th Edition).

Thursday, June 10th

1:00pm - "How do you..." Rotation (UCF Teaching Academy, Room 130)

Participants will rotate through discussions and sharing of their program's Capstones, Signature Pedagogies, Student Supports, Labs of Practice, Milestones

Group Prework Assignment: Bring a one page only description of your program's:

1. Capstone experience - what is it, how evaluated, when done, etc
2. Milestones - what are they, when are they, how evaluated, etc
3. Laboratory of practice - what is it, how used, etc
4. Signature pedagogy - what is it, how does it work, how used, etc
5. Student support structures - what are they, how are they designed, who implements them, etc

Members rotated through five 20-minute discussions that were guided by the following questions:

A. Capstone:

Does your capstone meet the following criteria?

1. Transfer - to practical use
2. Meaningful - staying engaged by using systematic inquiry.
3. Collaborative skills - if it were easy there would be more of it.
4. Management of faculty time - how they might better use their time.
5. Student time - we need to make sure that what they are doing is an important use of time and that they

• How is your capstone assessed?
• What types of rubrics does your program use?
• How does this capstone demonstrate competence?

B. Milestones:

• What are your milestones?
• How are they structured?
• How do they assess the student but keep stakes modest and low?
• Do they "form the habits of doing that tracking progress and that develop multiple lenses in students for transforming quality of schools, institutions, and education?
• How are these assessed? Rubrics?
• Are they used to assess the individual as well as the health of the cohort?
• How do you know a student is progressing?
• Health of cohort/student?

C. Laboratory of practice:

• How is it structured?
• How do you incorporate it into your program?
• How do you know if it was a successful experience?
• How is it assessed?
• How does your laboratory create a rhythm of moving back and forth from engagement with a concrete situation to understanding of theory and research to develop use of analytical reasoning in situations of uncertainty?

D. Signature pedagogy:

• How is it structured?
• How do you incorporate it into your program?
• How has this pedagogy contributed to the development of the graduate that your program anticipates?
• How do you get all of your faculty to utilize this pedagogy?

E. Student Support:

• What Scaffolding is necessary?
• How do you provide students with support to promote scholarly habits?
• How do you support practitioners to become scholarly practitioners?
• How do you handle struggling students?

Institutional Summaries 

Attached are the summaries that each participating institution contributed to the convening:

Arizona State University ♦ California State University - Fresno ♦ Lynn University ♦ Northern Illinois ♦ Pennsylvania State University ♦ University of Houston ♦ University of Maryland ♦ University of Missouri-Columbia ♦ University of Nebraska ♦ University of Oklahoma ♦ University of  Southern California ♦ University of Vermont ♦ University of Central Florida ♦ VIrginia Commonwealth University

Friday, June 11th

10:00am - Evaluation Discussion (Hotel Conference Room)

In groups and together, a discussion of how to evaluate the successes & challenges of CPED-influenced Ed.D. programs

Group Pre-work Assignment*: Members were asked to write a summary of their institutional plan for evaluating their new EdD program.

In small groups, members discussed the following:

• What is your institutional plan for evaluating this program?
• What are the goals of this evaluation?
• How will you know the program is successful?
• Who contributes to this evaluation?
• What steps will be taken to improve your program?

Summary of discussion:

What should be evaluated?

• Program design
• Program quality
• Student, alumni and faculty satisfaction surveys
• Content analysis of student work
• Career progression
• Predictors of success
• Fiscal impact
• Long-term impact

What are some ways evaluation can take shape?

• End of course evaluation - 1-year, 3-year student follow-up with website survey that provides place for feedback and improvement.
• Assess if program is meeting goals through faculty and student focus groups
• Use a "field of dreams" strategy-build it and they will come. Bring graduates back to discuss the program
• 5 year evaluation includes student outcomes assessment, self-study, visit by external reviewers, review by academic senate, graduate committee, provots and VP of Academic Affairs
• 1,2,3 year follow-ups, but not sure how we can assess actual learning
• Surveys to alumni
• Fidelity to model
• Outcomes to which students are able to do
• Evaluation or syllabi indentify CPED principles, and incorporate into student evaluations-this influences all aspects of program including admissions.
• Faculty conversations and feed back regarding courses and challenges
• Gather data set and the analysis will inform program
• Look at student/faculty ratio and costs
• CPED should publish how cohorts are evaluated -gather each program's criteria
• One measure of evaluation would be completion rates, placement rates
• Faculty load per semester based on advising
• Five advisees get a faculty release from a class.

*Note: institutional summaries are attached to the rotations session on Thursday June 10^th.