scholarly journals Interventions to assure rigour in a professional practice doctorate

2021 ◽  
pp. 10-18
Author(s):  
Martin Andrew
Keyword(s):  
Professional Practice ◽  
Practice Doctorate

An Adaptive Model for a Rigorous Professional Practice Doctorate

2016 ◽  
pp. 478-493
Author(s):  
Robert Crow ◽  
Kofi Lomotey ◽  
Kathleen Topolka-Jorissen
Keyword(s):  
Professional Practice ◽  
Doctoral Education ◽  
Science Methods ◽  
Adaptive Model ◽  
Improvement Science ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
Know How ◽  
Practice Doctorate ◽  
Doctoral Candidates ◽  
Alternative Capstone

As part of the current re-envisioning movement in professional practice doctoral education, the culminating activity and subsequent product have received heightened scrutiny. This chapter responds to the mandate that, in order to differentiate herself from her sister, the research-based PhD dissertation, the EdD's capstone exercise and culminating product arise through a practice-based, pedagogically appropriate application reflecting the philosophy and principles established for a problem-based dissertation in practice. Inexorably bound to context, and therefore unique in purpose, practice-driven models reflect a range of purposes and formats. This chapter presents a model that engages improvement science methods, the four dimensions characterizing a problem-based thesis, and the lens of contemporary thinking on the professional practice degree. The disquisition is an alternative capstone framework that affords doctoral candidates the opportunity to develop the qualitatively distinct ‘empirically-grounded know-how' of practitioner-scholar thinking.

An Adaptive Model for a Rigorous Professional Practice Doctorate

2016 ◽  
pp. 205-220
Author(s):  
Robert Crow ◽  
Kofi Lomotey ◽  
Kathleen Topolka-Jorissen
Keyword(s):  
Professional Practice ◽  
Doctoral Education ◽  
Science Methods ◽  
Adaptive Model ◽  
Improvement Science ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
Know How ◽  
Practice Doctorate ◽  
Doctoral Candidates ◽  
Alternative Capstone

As part of the current re-envisioning movement in professional practice doctoral education, the culminating activity and subsequent product have received heightened scrutiny. This chapter responds to the mandate that, in order to differentiate herself from her sister, the research-based PhD dissertation, the EdD's capstone exercise and culminating product arise through a practice-based, pedagogically appropriate application reflecting the philosophy and principles established for a problem-based dissertation in practice. Inexorably bound to context, and therefore unique in purpose, practice-driven models reflect a range of purposes and formats. This chapter presents a model that engages improvement science methods, the four dimensions characterizing a problem-based thesis, and the lens of contemporary thinking on the professional practice degree. The disquisition is an alternative capstone framework that affords doctoral candidates the opportunity to develop the qualitatively distinct ‘empirically-grounded know-how' of practitioner-scholar thinking.

scholarly journals Impacts of a professional practice doctorate: a collaborative enquiry

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
David Boud ◽  
Carol Costley ◽  
Steve Marshall ◽  
Brian Sutton
Keyword(s):  
Professional Practice ◽  
Practice Doctorate

scholarly journals Community-Engaged Faculty: A Must for Preparing Impactful Ed.D. Graduates

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 59-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Peterson ◽  
Jill Alexa Perry ◽  
Lina Dostilio ◽  
Debby Zambo
Keyword(s):  
Community Engagement ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Professional Practice ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Institutional Policies ◽  
Education Doctorate ◽  
Academic Environments ◽  
Problems Of Practice ◽  
Practice Doctorate ◽  
Traditional Roles

Since its inception nine years ago, CPED members have re-envisioned and implemented a new purpose for the professional practice doctorate in education, or Ed.D. This new purpose is grounded in the goal of preparing doctoral students to serve as scholarly practitioners, those who engage community as stakeholders in the process of improving problems of practice. Forming practitioners to be leaders in their communities under the CPED framework requires faculty who look beyond traditional roles by embEd.D.ing themselves in communities to work alongside practitioners working to transform their communities. Unfortunately, at many institutions, community-engagement is considered counter-normative to the traditional interpretation of research, teaching, and service, though it need not be. This paper will discuss the implications of CPED's community-engagement principle for Ed.D. programs, institutional policies, and academic environments in which community-engaged faculty do their work and the importance of these faculty members in the design of the Education Doctorate.

Laboratories of practice

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 346-359
Author(s):  
Valerie A. Storey ◽  
Tom Vitale ◽  
M. G. Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Professional Practice ◽  
Professional Growth ◽  
Organizational Context ◽  
Internal Validity ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Community Partners ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Problems Of Practice ◽  
Practice Doctorate

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to address the following assertions: first, the Laboratories of Practice (LoP) promotes professional growth. Second, the LoP enhances understanding of program design and delivery. Finally, the LoP has a financial value both to the organization where the LoP took place and to the university. The paper examines the responses of program candidates from two cohorts and the community partners they served to a survey focussed on the LoPs. Design/methodology/approach – In summer 2012, Cohort 1 students and their mentors completed a survey, a milestone paper, and reflective papers. LoP mentors (critical friends (CF)) were invited to give feedback on the LoP and the program candidate. In summer 2013, data were gathered via online surveys, milestone paper, and reflection papers from two program cohorts who experienced a LoP. In total, 48 students participated in the research. Findings – In relation to assertion no. 1, both the community partners’ and the students’ experiences with respect to the LoP made clear that the fieldwork has yielded positive outcomes. Students have found that they were able to draw from the classroom learnings to address the problems of practice in the real world setting. They reflected on lessons learned about themselves as well as the process itself, which sometimes resulted in redefining the problem at hand. Finally, the goals that were accomplished by the students during the LoP experience provided them with immense satisfaction, next steps, and, in some cases, the affirmation of their choice to participate in a professional practice doctorate. In relation to assertion no. 2, LoP data have been used by faculty to refine and improve the program and the LoP experience itself. In relation to assertion no. 3, while field mentors (CF) indicate that the services provided by the students during their LoP were invaluable and provided significant insights and improvements in their workplace, it was a challenge to assign a specific financial value to the LoP. Research limitations/implications – In terms of the internal validity of the study, it is possible that the findings are weakened due to the reliance on doctoral candidates and their mentors from one professional practice doctorate, and the potential for recall bias. In the future, a longitudinal or multiple source research study would have a much stronger internal validity. In terms of external validity, the study can only be reasonably generalized to doctoral students in professional practice doctorates grounded by CPED principles. Practical implications – While each LoP is highly individual, the process does require the candidates to reflect on their professional practice and their professional growth. CF facilitate reflection and conceptual thought, thereby developing professional practice. LoPs appear to be of value both to the individual and to their organizational context. Social implications – Students’ and LoP employers’ survey responses, established and/or furthered excellent relationships with many community partners, and provided quantifiable evidence of accomplishments. Originality/value – Many professional practice doctorates are struggling with what a LoP in the field should and could look like and the benefits of a LoP. This is an innovative paper as it explains the development and learning from one program that is becoming identified with its LoP. It is likely that university faculty will be interested in the design of the LoP and the value of the LoP as indicated by the survey results to the student, mentor, faculty, and program.

scholarly journals Accessibility Matters: Universal Design and the Online Professional Practice Doctorate

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Lindsey A. Chapman ◽  
Amanda M. Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Online Learning ◽  
Professional Practice ◽  
Universal Design ◽  
Doctoral Programs ◽  
Student Perspectives ◽  
Pedagogical Practices ◽  
Barriers To Learning ◽  
Online Doctoral Programs ◽  
Practice Doctorate ◽  
Doctoral Programming

Online doctoral programming geared toward working professionals can provide unprecedented flexibility in terms of time and place that affords greater access to a broader student demographic. At the same time, online learning poses its own unique set of challenges and limitations for students with and without disabilities. Universal Design (UD) is a framework built around the idea of proactively identifying and removing barriers to learning in the environment, pedagogical practices, and materials. In this essay, we highlight the necessity and relevance of UD to online doctoral programs and share insights related to its use in our program from faculty and student perspectives.

School-Based Speech-Language Pathologists' Adherence to Practice Guidelines for Assessment of English Learners

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Virginia L. Dubasik ◽  
Dubravka Svetina Valdivia
Keyword(s):  
Professional Practice ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Case History ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Dynamic Assessment ◽  
Federal Legislation ◽  
Assessment Practices ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
School Based

Purpose The purpose of this study was to ascertain the extent to which school-based speech-language pathologists' (SLPs) assessment practices with individual English learners (ELs) align with federal legislation and professional practice guidelines. Specifically, we were interested in examining SLPs' use of multiple tools during individual EL assessments, as well as relationships between practices and number of types of training experiences. Method School-based SLPs in a Midwestern state were recruited in person or via e-mail to complete an online survey pertaining to assessment. Of the 562 respondents who completed the survey, 222 (39.5%) indicated past or present experience with ELs, and thus, their data were included in the analyses. The questionnaire solicited information about respondent's demographics, caseload composition, perceived knowledge and skills and training experiences pertaining to working with ELs (e.g., graduate school, self-teaching, professional conferences), and assessment practices used in schools. Results The majority of respondents reported using multiple tools rather than a single tool with each EL they assess. Case history and observation were tools used often or always by the largest number of participants. SLPs who used multiple tools reported using both direct (e.g., standardized tests, dynamic assessment) and indirect tools (e.g., case history, interviews). Analyses revealed low to moderate positive associations between tools, as well as the use of speech-language samples and number of types of training experiences. Conclusions School-based SLPs in the current study reported using EL assessment practices that comply with federal legislation and professional practice guidelines for EL assessment. These results enhance our understanding of school-based SLPs' assessment practices with ELs and may be indicative of a positive shift toward evidence-based practice.

Scientifically Based Professional Practice

ASHA Leader ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (16) ◽  
pp. 26-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Gottfred
Keyword(s):  
Professional Practice

Practioner Reflection That Enhances Interprofessional Collaborative Practices for Serving Children Who Are Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (9) ◽  
pp. 3-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristina M. Blaiser ◽  
Mary Ellen Nevins
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Professional Practice ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Interprofessional Collaboration ◽  
The Self ◽  
Self Awareness ◽  
Collaborative Practices ◽  
Interprofessional Teams ◽  
Client Care

Interprofessional collaboration is essential to maximize outcomes of young children who are Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing (DHH). Speech-language pathologists, audiologists, educators, developmental therapists, and parents need to work together to ensure the child's hearing technology is fit appropriately to maximize performance in the various communication settings the child encounters. However, although interprofessional collaboration is a key concept in communication sciences and disorders, there is often a disconnect between what is regarded as best professional practice and the self-work needed to put true collaboration into practice. This paper offers practical tools, processes, and suggestions for service providers related to the self-awareness that is often required (yet seldom acknowledged) to create interprofessional teams with the dispositions and behaviors that enhance patient/client care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document