This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are used for visitor analysis, others are essential to making our site function properly and improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Click Accept to consent and dismiss this message or Deny to leave this website. Read our Privacy Statement for more.
Phases of Program Design
Share |

 

Length of time in CPED is not always an indicator of change or progress. Local context shapes much of what institutions can do, therefore we created these phases to help us understand where our members are in the process of designing or redesigning their EdD programs. You can see where individual institutions are on the members page.

Designing and Developing Phase

Member institutions in the Designing and Developing Phase are working on revising an existing traditional EdD program or have received approval for, and started working on,a new EdD program that will be launching soon (no graduates yet)In this phase, member institutions have defined a timeline thatis aimed atbut not limited to:

  • Developing or aligning their program’s mission, values and goals, and student outcomes with CPED’s Framework yet retains the uniqueness of the institution’s context;  

  • Reexamining or creating new recruitment and admission  standards, procedures, and processes for the education of professional practitioners who aspire to remain in practice both as they pursue the EdD degree and after graduation (as opposed to getting a tenured position at a university); 

  • Reexamining or creating new programs of study  that are time sensitive for working professionals and aimed at assisting them in developing the leadership and inquiry knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed for improvement work;  

  • Redesigning or designing new courses to meet the needs of adult-learners;  

  • Developing new, flexible, and innovative pedagogies to meet the needs of 21st century learners;  

  • Redesigning or designing Dissertations in Practice coursework and the mentoring and support structures needed to do this work collaboratively in diverse communities; 

  • Reexamining or creating graduation requirements that are practicalrigorous, and meet intended program outcomes;

  • Developing ways to engage students and community stakeholders in program design and development; 

  • Working to admit and graduate its first cohorts; 

  • Developing  a “continuous improvement” view of the program and developing ways to assess the program especially in terms of its impact on faculty, students and their communities 

 

In addition to working toward program developmentinstitutions in this phase are continually investing in faculty-development through readings, consultants, and/or conferences. These members are also working on becoming valued consortium members. They have selected a PI who is serving as communicator between their institution and CPED This individual, along with other faculty have started attending bi-annual convenings and from them, bringing back information to and share with others. Members at this phase are also contributing to CPED in varied ways (e.g., Learning Exchanges, committees, CIGs) and taking advantage of CPED’s networking opportunities by reaching out to other member institutions when the need arises.  

 

 

Implementing Phase

 

Member institutions in the Implementing phase have revised an existing traditional EdD program or developed a new program which has admitted students and may have graduated one cohortIn this phase, member institutions have produced evidence aimed that they are: 

  • Implementing program whose mission, goals, and student outcomes align with CPED’s Framework yet retains the uniqueness of the institution’s context 

  • Implementing new recruitment and admission standards, procedures, and processes for professional practitioners who aspire to remain in practice both as they pursue their EdD degree and after graduation (as opposed to getting a tenured position at a university); 

  • Implementing new programs of study that are time sensitive for working professionals and aimed at assisting them in developing the leadership and inquiry knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed for improvement work;  

  • Implementing courses that meet the needs of adult-learners;   

  • Creating and implementing new, flexible, and innovative pedagogies to meet the needs of 21st century learners;  

  • Preparing students to implement Dissertations in Practice coursework and the mentoring and support structures needed to do this work collaboratively in diverse communities; 

  • Refining graduation requirements that are practicalrigorous, and meet intended program outcomes; 

  • Admitting and graduating cohorts;  

  • Implementing ways to engage students and community stakeholders in program design and development; 

  • Continuing to admit new students and graduate cohorts; 

  • Employing a “continuous improvement” view of the program by designing and implementing ways to assess and evaluate the program(s), especially in terms of its impact on institutional policy, faculty, students and their communities.  

 

In addition to working toward program implementation, institutions in this phase are continually investing in faculty-development through readings, consultants, and/or conferences. The institutional PI serves as a strong communicator between the institution and CPED and several faculty members have been attending bi-annual convenings over a course of time. At convenings they are actively gathering ways to improve their program and sharing information as a means to help others learn through their experiences. These members share and bring new ideas back to their home institution to share with other faculty. Members at this phase actively and intentionally contribute to CPED in varied ways (e.g., Learning Exchanges, committees, CIGs) and take advantage of CPED’s networking opportunities by reaching out to other member institutions when the need arises. When appropriate they are also work as critical friends to other members. 

 

 

Experienced Phase

 

Member institutions in the Experienced phase have a program that has been implemented for several years and graduated cohorts. These member institutions can identify and produce evidence of: 

  • An experienced program whose mission, goals, and student outcomes align with CPED’s Framework yet retains the uniqueness of the institution’s context;  

  • Use of recruitment and admission standards, procedures, and processes that reflect CPED’s vision and Framework; 

  • Experience implementing programs of study that are time sensitive for working professionals and aimed at assisting them in developing the leadership and inquiry knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed for improvement work;  

  • Experience implementing courses that meet the needs of adult-learners;   

  • Experience creating and implementing new, flexible, and innovative pedagogies that meet the needs of 21st century learners; 

  • Experience working with, and mentoring students conducting Dissertation in Practice work with structures that allow inquiry into practice in traditional and non-traditional ways; 

  • Experience refining and utilizing graduation requirements that are practical, rigorous and meet intended program outcomes; 

  • Graduating multiple cohorts;  

  • Engaging students and community stakeholders in program design and development; 

  • Experience employing a “continuous improvement” view of the program by designing and implementing ways to assess and evaluate the program(s), especially in terms of its impact on institutional policy, faculty, students and their communities 

  • Participation in a post-CPED design evaluation and elements of the program have been improved as a result.   

 

Experienced member institutions have established programs but are continually working toward innovation, renewal, and revitalization. These members invest in faculty-development through readings, consultants, and/or conferences. Additionally, faculty may be presenting or publishing about their redesign work, contributing to the knowledge-base. 

 

The program’s PI serves as communicator between the institution and CPED and faculty members have engaged, and continue to engage in bi-annual convenings, often taking leadership roles in Learning Exchanges, committees, and CIGs. These members continually bring information from convenings back to their home institutions and use it to improve. They take leadership in networking and learning opportunities and often act as critical friends for institutions aother phases