Ten years and counting: salient doctoral program design and delivery  (Page 9/10)

Conclusion

Instead of a call for further segmenting EdD and PhD programs as preparation for practice or preparation for scholarship, this study suggests the value students attest to an emphasis on both scholarship and practice in their preparation as scholar-practitioner leaders who will make a true difference in schools and university settings. Students’voices suggest that important processes in the doctoral program for the student’s development as a scholar-practitioner leader include dialogue and critical inquiry. Important practices that support the processes include a portfolio assessment process designed to make critical connections between theory and practice. The findings suggest that high quality EdD programs have the opportunity of enriching students’lives and merging theory and practice to prepare school leaders who will work as practitioners to transform schools or as university professors. Rather than proclaiming sweeping generalizations of problems in EdD programs and issuing a call for redesign, this study suggests the value of opportunities for dialogue; in-depth study; extensive reading, writing, and reflective opportunities that can be attained in an educational leadership doctoral program. Portfolio assessment was identified as a practice to support the processes. This study supports that educational leadership doctoral programs can serve as vital links in preparing educational leaders both as scholars and as practitioners.

References

Anderson, G. (1996). The cultural politics of schools: Implications for leadership. In Kenneth Leithwood, Judith Chapman, Philip Hallinger, and Ann Hart (Eds.). International handbook of educational leadership and administration, Part 2. (pp. 947-966). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Bates, R. J. (1984). Toward a critical practice of educational administration. In Thomas Sergiovanni and John E. Corbally (Eds.) Leadership and organizational culture: New perspectives on administrative theory and practice. (pp. 260-274). Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Brown, K. M. (2006). A transformative andragogy for principal preparation programs. UCEA Review, SLV-2, 1-5.

Dantley, M. E. (2005). Moral leadership: Shifting the management paradigm. In Fenwick English (Ed.). The Sage Handbook of Educational Leadership: Advances in Theory, Research and Practice. (pp. 34-46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Donaldson, G. A. (2001). Cultivating leadership in schools: Connecting people, purpose, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Duffy, F. (2004). Moving upward together: Creating strategic alignment to sustain systemic school improvement. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow.

Elmore, R. F. (2005). School reform from the inside out: Policy, practice, and performance. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Education Press.

Foster, W. (1994). School leaders as transformative intellectuals: Towards a critical pragmatism. In N. Prestine and P. Thurton (Ed.), Advances in educational administration: New directions in educational administration: Policy, preparation, and practice Volume 3. (pp. 29-52). Greenwich, Connecticut: Jai Press, Inc.