|
|
What is the issue we are trying to address? (1)
Many of our doctoral students are former teachers and lack a
discipline-based research background from their undergraduate or
master's preparation, i.e., they enter our program with little or no
previous research training;. (2)
Prior experience as teachers and lack of research training sometimes
result in students who are skeptical of the importance of research for
educational improvement; in some cases, this skepticism has led to a
rift between students eager to learn more about research and those with
other orientations. (3)
Students' inconsistent patterns of course taking were hampering our
ability to offer truly advanced courses (because almost every course
included some novices).
|
|
|
How do we know that this is an issue? Internal & External Research Internal: Exit Surveys of
students in their final semester of doctoral study in which they
evaluated their graduate experiences along several dimensions,
including scholarly development, coursework, advising,
communication/collegiality, and overall climate of the School. Whole-faculty discussions led by committee members to generate a list of issues to address and ideas to consider. Based on this information, the committee's agenda covered many aspects of the program: coursework,
research experiences, teaching experiences, advising and mentoring,
program requirements (e.g., publishable papers, comprehensive
examinations, dissertations), program size, student recruitment, and
funding. External: The committee examined several sources of information on doctoral education. This information included recent literature on graduate preparation in education,
including reports by the Pew Charitable Trusts, the Woodrow Wilson
Foundation, the National Research Council, and the Carnegie Foundation,
as well as numerous books and articles. From websites and phone calls,
we also gathered information about the top 15 graduate programs in
education, as rated in the 2002 U.S. News and World Report. This
information included course requirements, degree requirements, teaching
and research experiences, and financial aid packages at each school.
Exit Survey
|
|
|
|
What is the change or innovation that is intended to address this issue? Overview of the New Doctoral Program at the University of Colorado, Boulder YEAR ONE: THE CORE First
Semester: Big Ideas: Perspectives on Classroom Teaching and Learning (3
hrs) Qualitative Methods I (3 hrs) Quantitative Methods I (3 hrs)
Specialty Seminar (1 hr) Second
Semester: Big Ideas: Education Research and Social Policy (3 hrs)
Qualitative Methods II (3 hrs) Quantitative Methods II (3 hrs)
Specialty Seminar (1 hr) YEAR TWO: INTERMEDIATE/ADVANCED First Semester : Multicultural Educ (3 hrs) Specialty Area Courses/Advanced Methods Courses (3 or 6 hrs) Second Semester: Specialty Area Courses/Advanced Methods Courses (3 or 6 hrs) YEAR THREE: INTERMEDIATE /CAPSTONE Specialty Area Courses/Advanced Methods Courses/Capstones (3 or 6 hrs)
Perspectives on Classroom Teaching and Learning
Qualitative Methods I
Quantitative Methods I
Education Research and Social Policy
Qualitative Methods II
Quantitative Methods II
Multicultural Education
|
|
|
Why did we select that approach? In
making this proposal for a CORE curriculum, we were doubling the
research methods courses required (from one course to two in each
methodology), but by incorporating required material from old courses
with new material in the core courses, we were able to eliminate a few
old courses and hold the total increase in the number of required
courses to only one. Given
the emphases of our School and the expertise of the faculty, we chose
"Perspectives on Classroom Teaching and Learning" and "Education
Research and Social Policy" as the two big ideas courses to offer
first-year students. The first course focuses on behavioral, cognitive,
and socio-cultural theories of teaching and learning, along with
associated empirical studies. The second course focuses on the
relationship between education research findings and social policy
initiatives since the 1950s. In the terminology of our old program, the
first course is from psychological foundations; the second is from
social foundations. The
two courses in quantitative methods focus on experimental designs and
include statistics. The two courses in qualitative methods focus on
interpretive designs and include various forms of qualitative inquiry
and analysis strategies. Individual student research projects are part
of both course sequences. To
promote students' ability to integrate their learning and "to talk"
across courses, we included two "cross-cutting" topics each semester
(topics taken up in each syllabus at the same time during the
semester). For example, one cross-cutting topic was organized around
the question: If a teacher wants to know whether one reading program is
better for her students than another, how could you find out? This
topic can be approached substantively (in Perspectives), experimentally
(in Quantitative Methods), and qualitatively (in Qualitative Methods).
A second cross-cutting topic was the 1966 Coleman report on schooling
and socioeconomic status (the substance of the report and its
implications; its use of quantitative methods; its use of qualitative
methods). This commitment to the complementarity of research
perspectives and methods was one of the guiding principles underlying
our design of the core.
|
|
|
|
What is the intended effect of the innovation? A. To develop a common language and shared discourse about education research B. To present common norms and standards for the conduct of education research C. To build an intellectual and methodological foundation for advanced, specialized coursework
|
|
|
What data or evidence will demonstrate the effect of our innovation? Student Surveys Faculty Surveys 1st Year Cohort Comments after 1st Semester of CORE Coursework: "The older graduate students are in awe of our cohort and [our] classes and faculty." "If there's one major thing I've learned, it's that I'm doing the right thing in the right place! Thank you!" "I
appreciate what's being done to revamp the PhD program. I'm impressed
by my colleagues in the cohort and will miss them when we're not in
class together anymore. And I've enjoyed working with the
professorsâ€â€they've all been excellent and inspiring."
s
Faculty Survey
Student Survey
|
|
|