1. CPED Framework in the
Online Environment
Fall 2013

2. Goals for the Session
 Understand the challenges of developing scholarly
practitioners through online programs
 Reflect on the challenges of incorporating the
CPED principles/framework into highly structured
online programs
 Develop strategies to deal with traditional college
structures, faculty, and students when trying to
change the traditional
 Reflect on the value of the CPED framework to the
“quality” discussion of online education

3. TTU and CPED
 Second wave CPED member
 Have PI’s for both the Higher Ed and
Educational Leadership programs
 We are incorporating parts of CPED
framework into all of our programs (Ed.D.,
Ph.D., and M.Ed.)

4. HIED Doctoral Program Enrollments (N = 157)
Ed.D. - Onsite
4%
Ph.D.
28%
Ed.D. - Online
68%

5. Trademark Outcome of Ed.D.
Graduates of the Ed.D. in Higher Education
Administration will be scholarly practitioners,
change agents, and influencers with the skills and
competencies to name, frame, and solve
problems of practice, using empirical evidence to
evaluate impact (principles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6).
Understanding the importance of equity and
social justice (principle 1), they use applied
theories and practical research as tools of
collaborative change (principles 2, 5, 6).

6. Characteristics of Culture/Administration
 University sees online as a way to reach
40,000 students
 Supportive Dean who is reforming the
College of Education
 College as a whole does not fully embrace
or understand distance learning

7. Characteristics of Faculty
 Two assistant and one associate
professors
 Added two new assistant professors in fall
2013
 Faculty to student ratio if everyone had
equal loads – about 1:32
 Heavy reliance on adjuncts (practitioners)

8. Characteristics of Students
 All work full time
 Are required to be currently working in a
higher education institution and must be
in a professional position
 Require a minimum of three years
professional experience in higher
education or similar leadership experien ce

9. Program Overview
 Was purposefully created for online delivery to
serve needs in the state of Texas
 It is a 60 hour degree (above master’s) completed
in 3 years (including master’s work = 90 hours)
• 2 years of intensive coursework
• 1 year – thematic problem-based dissertation
working with external collaborative partner
(higher education institutions)
 30 hours of graduate-level work is accepted from
the master’s

10. Program Overview
 Students are enrolled once a year in a cohort
 Normally admit 15 – 20 per year; fall 2013 –
admitted 3 cohorts
 Have them separate into two foci:
• Community college administration
• Four-year college/university administration

11. Program Overview
 There are no substitutions for the 60 required
hours of coursework (prescribed)
 Students complete 21 credit hours per year, six
(6) in the fall term, six (6) in the spring term, and
nine (9) hours across the summer for two years;
third year is dissertation
 Three (3) mandatory one (1) week summer
professional development sessions are required
in Lubbock, TX the first three years of the
program

12. Program Overview
 Program courses are sequenced in three
phases
• Phase 1 – knowledge level
• Phase 2 – hypothetical practice
• Phase 3 – authentic practice
 Evaluation occurs at the end of each course
and at the end of each phase
 Remediation occurs as needed
 Formal evaluations by the full-time faculty of
each student’s progress occur each year

13. Program Overview
 Field-based internships incorporated into most
courses – using the concept of students’
institutions as “laboratories of practice” (principles
2, 3, & 4)
 Traditional qualifying examination process (though
take home)
 Pseudo-themed Dissertations of Practice
• Problem identified within a higher education
institution – preferably one that is affecting many
throughout the state
• Collaborative partner sits on dissertation
committee

14. Challenges – Traditional Administrative
Structures/Culture
 Do not see that multiple cohorts of students at
different stages in the process need to be
“managed”
 Adherence to traditional policies and tenure
structures; faculty are not recognized for the “extra”
time and effort they are putting into the initiative
 University and College are counting on us to
generate head count

15. Challenges – Faculty
 Asking faculty to do more while rewarded under





traditional measures
Faculty are not required to train to be online
teachers
Course quality is inconsistent
No instructional design help to produce courses
that are consistent across the board
No policies to standardize program expectations
Not all faculty are “practitioners” and their approach
diminishes the application of content

16. Challenges – Faculty
 This summer we had 14 students complete
qualifying examinations at the same time – faculty
nightmare (and it was in the summer)
 Two faculty are working with the 14 students on
dissertations
 Each faculty member has a different process and
expectations
 The College of Education is not ready to look at
managing this program outside of the traditional
norms of consensus on everything

17. Challenges – Students
 New student application process is not stringent
enough
• University wants graduate students – everyone
looks good on paper
 Students work more than full time
 Very busy – taking 6 (fall), 6 (spring), and 9
(summer) credit hours – leaves limited time to
“engage”
 Difficult to remediate a student that is not local

18. Challenges – Students
 Students struggle with writing at the appropriate
levels
 Students are not prepared to conduct research –
but reformed program is designed to fix this through
periodic remediation
 Students falling out of cohort sequence due to life
events
 Student falling out of cohort sequence due to failing
qualifying exams

19. Challenges – Curriculum
 One year dissertation is extremely time consuming
and takes a tremendous amount of faculty time
 Faculty are not on the same page of the process of
completing a dissertation
 Collaborative partners are willing to help now – but
for how long?

20. Challenges - Curriculum
 Class projects use “laboratories of practice”
• Students must use their institutions as their
laboratories
 Challenges with this are:
• Difficult to supervise students on their projects at a
distance
• Relying on partners at the institution to give their
time and access to authentic situations
• Students do not like to get outside their departments
• Students do work full time and these projects are
time intensive

21. Challenges – Dissertation in Practice
 TTU does not currently support “group
dissertation” concept
 Normally, the program follows the traditional
dissertation format of 5 chapters
 The online Ed.D.’s first cohort is doing pseudothematic dissertations
 Problems of practice were identified through the
program faculty by working with area
community colleges

22. Challenges - Dissertation
 First cohort in the program is 13 students spread
across Texas and 1 in Michigan
 Students are having difficulty in staying together as
a group
 Groups are not using their support-system from
cohort as we had hoped
• It has become an everyone for him or herself
mentality
 We have insufficient number of faculty to spend the
amount of time necessary to get these students
through in a year

23. Challenges - Dissertation
 We are seeing evidence that completing a
dissertation at a distance is very isolating
 Have now moved to allowing students to
work on a problem at their institution
• Difficult to get students to think in context of
“broad problem” in the field

24. Challenges - Quality
 Not all faculty expect the same rigor
 Not all students admitted should be in an
accelerated program
 Challenging to incorporate “laboratories of
practice” throughout the curriculum and
ensure the projects have merit and are
rigorous – and that students are prepared to
deliver to the partner institutions

25. Session Activity

26. Activity Logistics
 If numbers permit – divide into four equal
groups (might want to align based on focus K-12 focus; higher ed focus)
 Each group will address the questions
provided (will be provided on a hand-out and
on the next slide)
 Use chart paper and markers – reflect on the
questions as a group and be ready to report
out

27. Questions to be Addressed
 How do traditional culture/administrative
structures challenge innovation in
incorporating the CPED
framework/principles into distance
programs?
 How does the faculty role change in a
CPED-reformed online program? How do
we incentivize for workload and innovation?

28. Questions to be Addressed
 What are the challenges of ensuring student
success in an online CPED-reformed
program?
 What are the challenges of getting students
through the Dissertation of Practice –
online?
 How can we use the CPED principles to
“redefine” the distance quality stereotype?

29. Wrap-up Questions

30. Contact Information
Dr. Stephanie J. Jones, Ed.D.
Texas Tech University
Associate Professor
Higher Education Program Coordinator
stephanie.j.jones@ttu.edu