0.10 Storms, b.a., prada, m. j., & Donahue, e. n. (september 2011  (Page 8/8)

JDP graduate. One of my greatest fears was getting caught in ideological or methodological battles between my dissertation’s committee members. I expressed this concern to my advisor early on after she agreed to serve as my chair. My advisor helped me in the process of selecting the university faculty members who I would invite to serve as my dissertation committee members. With her insightful guidance, she helped identify those faculty members who possessed research expertise (methodological or areas of concentration) that would advance my research agenda. Once the research committee was invited and they had accepted, my advisor’s ability to manage the relationships among the committee members facilitated and directed their review of my work and focused their input on helping me create a high quality dissertation.

At specific points in the evolution of my dissertation, my advisor encouraged me to engage my other committee members directly to take advantage of their expertise. I consulted with one of the committee members in depth for quantitative analysis assistance and with the other committee member for the research foundation of my theoretical framework. She assisted me in preparing for these auxiliary consultation sessions to make sure that the input I was soliciting was aligned with the larger direction of the dissertation project. The goal was to channel the deep support of the various committee members while avoiding the possibility of “bird walks.”

ELSJ graduate. Since it was important for me to complete my dissertation within one year, not only for personal reasons but to meet university requirements, having my advisor describe and clarify the committee member work expectations and advocate for me with them made the process run more smoothly for me. My advisor and I worked on several revisions before involving other members of the committee. She then gave members specific dates by which they needed to provide feedback for each draft. This was also a time for each member to ask any clarifying questions and offer challenges to my arguments. My advisor helped me to merge any new information I gathered from my conversations with committee members into my document and to eliminate anything that was outside of the scope of my study. My advisor essentially served as a filter for any overall concerns about the study and kept committee members centered on my goal of completing a high quality dissertation.

Conclusion

Whether one sees Ed.D. programs possibly improving outcomes for K-12 students or as simply professional development for the participants, one thing seems clear: Neither purpose is well served if doctoral candidates do not complete their degrees. In fact, the pallor of having the “all but dissertation” banner over one’s head is likely to have negative professional and personal impact on a school leader. It is imperative that as doctoral programs for educators proliferate, university faculty develop strategies and skills that will help school leaders learn the lessons a doctoral experience can teach while successfully completing the dissertation experience. Hopefully, the lessons learned from this reflective piece will be useful for doctoral candidates and their advisors.

References

Allan, P.,&Dory, J (2001). Understanding doctoral program attrition: An empirical study. Lubin school of business: Faculty working papers. Pace University. Retrieved from: (External Link)

California State University (2011). Doctor of education (Ed.D.) in educational leadership: Program contacts. Retrieved from (External Link)

Brynjulson, M.,&Storms, B.A. (2005 ) Coming together: One district’s inquiry. Leadership, 34 (2), 16-19.

Cooperrider, D.L,&Whitney, D. (2005) A positive revolution in change: Appreciative inquiry. Retrieved from (External Link)

Cooperrider, D.L., Whitney, D.,&Stavros, J.M. (2008). Appreciate inquiry handbook for leaders of change (2 ^nd edition). Brunswick: Crown Custom Publishing.

Creighton, T. (2008). Logic models: Evaluating education doctorates in educational administration. NCPEA Connexions.3 (1). Retrieved from http://cnx.org/content/m16294/latest/

Di Pierro, M. (2007). Excellence in doctoral education: Defining best practices. College Student Journal, 41 (2), 368-375. Retrieved from EBSCO host .

Golde, C. M. (2005). The role of the department and discipline in doctoral student attrition: Lessons from four departments. Journal of Higher Education , 76(6), 669-700. Retrieved from EBSCO host .

Hammond, S. (1998). The thin book of appreciative inquiry . pp. 6-7. Retrieved from: (External Link)

Lee, G.,&Storms, B.A. (2003). Using research to improve practice: The role of educational leaders and those who prepare them . Educational Leadership and Administration: Teaching and Program Development , 15 , 85-94.

Levine, A. (2005). Change in the principal's office: The role of universities. Chronicle of Higher Education , 51 (32), B16. Doi: AN 16835369

McIlveen, P., George, M., Voss, S.,&Laguardia, A. (2006). Surviving the doctoral dissertation experience: The N.W. sisters’ study. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 7 (4), 168-185.

Public postsecondary education: California State University: Doctor of education degrees, California Senate Bill 724. (2005). Retrieved from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_724&sess=0506&house=B&author=scott

Shulman, L.S. (2010, April 4). Doctoral education shouldn't be a marathon: The salvation may mean embracing the enemy: professional schools. Chronicle of Higher Education Review . Retrieved from (External Link)

Shulman, L.S., Golde, C. M., Bueshel, A. B.,&Garabedian, K. J. (2006). Reclaiming education’s doctorates: A critique and a proposal. Educational Researcher . 35 (6), 25-32.

Storms, B.A.,&Gordon, A. (2005 ). Inquiry as a strategy for leading school improvement. Educational Leadership and Administration: Teaching and Program Development, 17 , 59-74.

Storms, B.A.,&Lee, G. (2001). CFASST Implementation and reflective practice: The interplay of structures and perceptions. Issues in Teacher Education, 10 (2), 23-38.

Zhao, C-M., Golde, C. M.,&McCormick, A.C. (2005). More than a signature: How advisor choice and advisor behavior affect doctoral student dissertation . Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal. Retrieved from (External Link)