Contemporary efforts to reform educational leadership preparation programs span more than three decades. As scholars have chronicled this critical examination of leadership practice and preparation, they have also proposed new directions, addressing the very fundamentals of preparation program design, including student selection, content, pedagogy, field-based learning, and assessment. This article reports findings from a larger national survey of doctoral-level educational leadership programs (n = 103) and is descriptive of assessment activities that are embedded in EdD and PhD leadership programs. Implications of findings and avenues for future research and development in the areas of student assessment are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArchbaldD. (2008). Research versus problem solving for the education leadership doctoral thesis: Implications for form and function.Educational Administration Quarterly,44(5), 704–739.
2.
BrescianiM., & UlineC. (2012). Assessing EdD programs for program evaluation and improvement.Assessment Update,24, 7–9.
3.
ButtramJ. L. (2015). Introduction: National survey of U.S. doctoral educational leadership programs.International Journal of Educational Reform,24(3), 208–211.
4.
ButtramJ. L., & DoolittleV. (2015). Redesign of EdD and PhD educational leadership programs.International Journal of Educational Reform,24(3), 281–306.
5.
CaboniT. C., & ProperE. (2009). Re-envisioning the professional doctorate for educational leadership and higher education leadership: Vanderbilt University's Peabody College EdD program.Peabody Journal of Education,84, 61–68.
6.
CAEP Commission on Standards and Performance Reporting. (2013). Draft recommendations for the CAEP Board.Washington, DC: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation. Retrieved from http://caepnet.org/commission/standards/
7.
CosnerS., TozerS., & SmylieM. (2012). The EdD at the University of Illinois at Chicago: Using continuous improvement to promote school leadership preparation.Planning and Changing,1, 127–148.
8.
Darling-HammondL., MeyersonD., La PointeM. M., & OrrM. T. (2009). Preparing principals for a changing world.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
9.
EatonJ. S. (2012). An overview of U.S. accreditation.Washington, DC: Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
10.
EvansC. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education.Review of Educational Research,32(1), 70–120.
11.
EversonS. T. (2009). A professional doctorate in educational leadership: Saint Louis University's EdD program.Peabody Journal of Educational,84, 86–99.
12.
FryB., BottomsG., & O'NeillK. (2005). Challenge to lead series: The principal internship. How can we get it right?Atlanta, GA: Southern Region Education Board.
13.
FurtwenglerW., & FurtwenglerC. (1998). Performance assessment in the preparation of educational administrators.Journal of School Leadership,8, 65–84.
14.
GoldringE., & ShuermannP. (2009). The changing context of K–12 administration: Consequences for EdD program design and delivery.Peabody Journal of Education,84, 9–43.
15.
GriffithsD. E., StoutR. T., & ForsythP. B. (Eds.). (1988). Leaders for America's schools: The report and papers of the National Commission on Excellence in Educational Administration.Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
16.
GroganM., & AndrewsR. (2002). Defining preparation and professional development for the future.Educational Administration Quarterly,38, 233–256.
17.
GuthrieJ. W. (2009). The case for a modern doctor of education degree (Ed.D.): Multipurpose education doctorates no longer appropriate.Peabody Journal of Education,84(1), 3–8.
18.
GuthrieJ. W., & MarshD. D. (2009). Strategies for elevating the public and professional regard of the EdD.Peabody Journal of Education,84, 100–106.
19.
HessF. M., & KellyA. P. (2005). An innovative look, a recalcitrant reality: The politics of principal preparation reform.Educational Policy,19, 155–180.
20.
HuangT., BeachumF. D., WhiteG. P., KaimalG., FitzGeraldA. M., & ReedP. (2012). Preparing urban school leaders: What works.Planning and Changing,43(1/2), 72–95.
21.
JacksonB., & KelleyC. (2002). Exceptional and innovative programs in educational leadership.Educational Administration Quarterly,38(2), 192–212.
22.
JacobsonA., O'NeilK., FryB., HillD., & BottomsG. (2002). Are SREB states making progress? Tapping, preparing and licensing school leaders who can influence student achievement.Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board.
23.
Joint Task Force on Student Learning. (1998). Powerful partnerships: A shared responsibility for learning.Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.
24.
KirkpatrickD. L. (1998). Evaluating training programs: The four levels (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
25.
KochanF. K., & LockeD. L. (2009). Student assessment in educational leadership preparation programs: Looking at our past, examining our present, and framing our future. In YoungM. D., CrowG. M., MurphyJ., & OgawaR. T., Handbook of research on the education of school leaders (pp. 417–456). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
26.
KuncelN. R., HezlettS. A., & OnesD. S. (2001). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the Graduate Record Examinations: Implications for graduate student selection and performance.Psychological Bulletin,127(1), 162–181.
27.
LeithwoodK., & LevinB. (2008). Understanding and assessing the impact of leadership development. In LumbyJ., CrowG., & PashiardisP. (Eds.), International handbook on the preparation and development of school leaders (pp. 280–302). New York: Routledge.
28.
LevineA. (2005). Educating school leaders.Washington, DC: Education Schools Project.
29.
MarshD. D., & DemboM. H. (2009). Rethinking school leadership programs: The USC EdD program in perspective.Peabody Journal of Education,84, 69–85.
30.
McCarthyM. M. (1999). The evolution of educational leadership preparation programs. In MurphyJ., & LouisK. S. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration: A project of the American Educational Research Association (pp. 119–139). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
31.
MorrisonT., & MorrisonM. (1995). A meta-analytic assessment of the predictive validity of the quantitative and verbal components of the Graduate Record Examination with graduate grade point average representing the criterion of graduate success.Educational and Psychological Measurement,55, 309–316.
32.
MurphyJ. (1999). Changes in the preparation programs: Perceptions of department chairs. In MurphyJ., & ForsythP. B. (Eds.), Educational administration: A decade of reform (pp. 170–191). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
33.
MurphyJ. (2001). The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34.
MurphyJ. (2005). Unpacking the foundations of ISLLC standards and addressing concerns in the academic community.Educational Administration Quarterly,41, 154–191.
35.
MurphyJ. (2006). Preparing school leaders.Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
36.
MurphyJ., & OrrM. T. (2009). Industry standards for preparation in educational leadership.Leadership and Teaching in Educational Leadership,17, 9–11.
37.
MurphyJ., & VriesengaM. (2004). Research on preparation programs in educational administration: An analysis.Columbia, MO: University Council for Educational Administration.
38.
MurphyJ., YoungM. D., CrowG. M., & OgawaR. T. (2009). Introduction: Exploring the broad terrain of leadership preparation in education. In YoungM. D., CrowG. M., MurphyJ., & OgawaR. T., Handbook of research on the education of school leaders (pp. 1–22). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
39.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (2008). Professional standards for the accreditation of teacher preparation institutions.Washington, DC: Author.
40.
NorcrossJ. C., HanychJ. M., & TerranovaR. D. (1996). Graduate study in psychology: 1992–1993.American Psychologist,51, 631–643.
41.
OrrM. T., & BarberM. E. (2009). Program evaluation in leadership preparation and related fields. In YoungM. D., CrowG. M., MurphyJ., & OgawaR. T., Handbook of research on the education of school leaders (pp. 457–498). New York: Routledge/ Taylor & Francis Group.
42.
OrrM. T., YoungM. D., & RorrerA. K. (n.d.). Developing evaluation evidence: A formative and summative evaluation planner for educational leadership preparation programs.Salt Lake City, UT: National Center for the Evaluation of Educational Leadership Preparation and Practice.
43.
OsguthorpeR. T., & WongM. J. (1993). The PhD versus the EdD: Time for a decision.Innovative Higher Education,18(1), 47–63.
44.
PerezL. G., UlineC. L., JohnsonJ. F.Jr., James-WardC., & BasomM. R. (2011). Foregrounding fieldwork in leadership preparation: The transformative capacity of authentic inquiry.Educational Administration Quarterly,47(1), 217–257.
45.
PerryJ. A. (2012). To EdD or not to EdD.Kappan,49(1), 41–44.
46.
PounderD. G. (2006). A discussion of the task force's collective findings.Educational Administration Quarterly,36(3), 465–473.
47.
PounderD. G. (2012). School Leadership Preparation and Practice Survey instruments and their uses.Journal of Research on Leadership Education,7, 254–274.
48.
ShulmanL., GoldeC., BueschelA., & GarabedianK. (2006). Reclaiming education's doctorates: A critique and a proposal.Educational Researcher,35, 25–32.
49.
SmrekarC., & McGranerK. (2009). From curricular alignment to the culminating project: The Peabody College EdD capstone.Peabody Journal of Education,84, 48–60.
50.
Teacher Education Accreditation Council. (2011). The TEAC guide to accreditation.Washington, DC: Author.
51.
ToyeC., BlankR., SandersN. M., & WilliamsA. (2007). Key state education policies on P–12 Education, 2006: Results of a 50 state survey.Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
52.
U.S. Department of Education. (2006). A test of leadership: Charting the future of U.S. higher education.Washington, DC: Secretary of Education's Commission on the Future of Higher Education.
WerginJ. F. (2011). Rebooting the EdD.Harvard Educational Review,81(1), 119–139.
55.
YoungM. D., & PetersonG. J. (2002). The National Commission for the Advancement of Educational Leadership Preparation: An introduction.Educational Administration Quarterly,38(2), 130–136.
56.
YoungM. D., PetersonG. J., & ShortP. M. (2002). The complexities of substantive reform: A call for interdependence among key stakeholders.Educational Administration Quarterly,38(2), 137–175.
57.
ZamboD., & IsaiS. (2013). Action research and the education doctorate: New promises and visions.Journal of Research on Leadership Education,8, 97–112.
58.
ZirkelP. A. (2012). Doctoral programs in educational leadership: A duality framework of commonality and differences.Educational Considerations,40(1), 20–32.
